Wein v Reeves [2022] NSWLEC 1019

Wein v Reeves [2022] NSWLEC 1019

Trees 5 and 6 did not form a hedge, nor did Hedge 2 contain Tree 7; Trees 1-4 and 4A formed a hedge, but due to their narrow proportion, distance, and available broad views, obstruction was not severe, and even if severe, balancing interests did not favour intervention.

Parties
Applicant: Glenn Wein; Respondent: Steven Reeves
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Tree Dispute / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006, Hedging and Obstruction of Views, Balancing of Interests
Property Law Environmental Law Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Hedging and Obstruction of Views Balancing of Interests

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glenn Wein

Applicant

Steven Reeves

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tree Dispute / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether trees were planted so as to form a hedge under the Trees Act
  2. 2 Whether trees severely obstruct a view from the applicant's dwelling
  3. 3 Balancing of interests between applicant's view and respondent's privacy, ecosystem contribution, and tree health

Ratio Decidendi

Trees 5 and 6 did not form a hedge, nor did Hedge 2 contain Tree 7; Trees 1-4 and 4A formed a hedge, but due to their narrow proportion, distance, and available broad views, obstruction was not severe, and even if severe, balancing interests did not favour intervention.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.