Djordjevic v Nakhla [2023] NSWLEC 1211
The application was refused because the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of actual or likely damage in the near future from the trees, nor of severe obstruction of sunlight to windows; debris and maintenance issues fall within reasonable urban expectations and are not actionable without demonstrated damage; and future/possible damage and sunlight obstruction were unsupported or speculative.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 02 February 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Tree Dispute / Final Determination
- Outcome
- Application refused
- Legal Topics
- ['trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006' 'neighbourhood Disputes' 'obstruction of Sunlight' 'property Damage' 'hedges']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Tree Dispute / Final Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether debris from respondent's trees constitutes actionable damage under Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006" "Whether the trees are likely in the near future to cause damage to applicant's property" 'Whether the trees severely obstruct sunlight to applicant’s dwelling windows']
Ratio Decidendi
The application was refused because the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of actual or likely damage in the near future from the trees, nor of severe obstruction of sunlight to windows; debris and maintenance issues fall within reasonable urban expectations and are not actionable without demonstrated damage; and future/possible damage and sunlight obstruction were unsupported or speculative.
Court Disposition
Application refused
Orders
- ['The application is refused.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment