Williams v Johnson [2014] NSWLEC 1176

Williams v Johnson [2014] NSWLEC 1176

The trees did not cause a severe obstruction of sunlight or views at the time of the hearing as required by s 14E(2)(a) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006; therefore, the Court lacked jurisdiction to make the orders sought.

Parties
Applicant: Garry Williams; Respondent: Wilma Johnson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006, Hedge Height Disputes, Obstruction of Views, Obstruction of Sunlight
Environmental Law Property Law Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Hedge Height Disputes Obstruction of Views Obstruction of Sunlight

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Garry Williams

Applicant

Wilma Johnson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trees form a hedge over 2.5 metres tall as required under the Act
  2. 2 Whether the hedge causes a severe obstruction of sunlight or views within the meaning of s 14E(2)(a) of the Act
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's interest in remedying the obstruction outweighs reasons not to interfere with the trees under s 14E(2)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The trees did not cause a severe obstruction of sunlight or views at the time of the hearing as required by s 14E(2)(a) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006; therefore, the Court lacked jurisdiction to make the orders sought.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.