Langtip v Granstrom [2008] NSWLEC 44

Langtip v Granstrom [2008] NSWLEC 44

The Bunya pine tree itself was healthy, showed no signs of decline, contributed positively to visual amenity, and did not warrant removal. However, because Bunya pine cone production and fall are unreliable, cones may weigh between 10 and 12 kg, may fall from a height of about 18 m and into the applicant's property, and cone fall had previously occurred, the cone fall had caused, was causing and was likely in the near future to cause property damage and was likely to cause injury. Regular cone removal by a qualified arborist was therefore required. Compensation was refused because loss of quiet enjoyment, stress and anxiety were outside the compensation jurisdiction, and the shed roofing...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 January 2008
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 7 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Concerning a Bunya Pine Tree / Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Application upheld in part; cone removal orders made; tree removal and compensation refused.
Legal Topics
['tree Related Property Damage' 'risk of Injury From Falling Bunya Pine Cones' 'compensation for Property Damage' 'tree and Cone Removal Orders']
['trees (neighbours)' 'property' 'land and Environment Court Proceedings'] ['tree Related Property Damage' 'risk of Injury From Falling Bunya Pine Cones' 'compensation for Property Damage' 'tree and Cone Removal Orders']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Under S 7 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Concerning a Bunya Pine Tree / Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Bunya pine tree should be removed because it has caused, is causing, or is likely in the near future to cause damage to the applicant's property or injury to any person." 'Whether orders should be made for regular removal of Bunya pine cones from the tree.' "Whether compensation should be ordered for alleged damage to the applicant's shed roof, loss of quiet enjoyment, stress and anxiety."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Bunya pine tree itself was healthy, showed no signs of decline, contributed positively to visual amenity, and did not warrant removal. However, because Bunya pine cone production and fall are unreliable, cones may weigh between 10 and 12 kg, may fall from a height of about 18 m and into the applicant's property, and cone fall had previously occurred, the cone fall had caused, was causing and was likely in the near future to cause property damage and was likely to cause injury. Regular cone removal by a qualified arborist was therefore required. Compensation was refused because loss of quiet enjoyment, stress and anxiety were outside the compensation jurisdiction, and the shed roofing...

Court Disposition

Application upheld in part; cone removal orders made; tree removal and compensation refused.

Orders

  • ['The application is upheld, in part.' 'As soon as practicable but no later than 29 February 2008 the upper crown of the Bunya pine tree shall be climbed or physically accessed by other means, and all cones shall be removed from the tree.' 'During the first two weeks of December each year the upper crown of the...