Trewin v Felton (No. 2) [2007] NSWSC 1112

Trewin v Felton (No. 2) [2007] NSWSC 1112

Dominant owners are required to replace inferior fencing with fencing commensurate to other boundaries before opening new access; restraints imposed on removal until compliance.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Audrey Trewin; Second Plaintiff: Stephen Albert Trewin; Defendant: Graeme John Felton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Real Property Easements / Post Final Judgment, Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Interlocutory orders granted restraining plaintiffs and requiring replacement fence; plaintiffs to pay defendant's costs.
Legal Topics
Easements, Right of Carriageway, Fencing Obligations, Interlocutory Relief
Real Property Equity Easements Right of Carriageway Fencing Obligations Interlocutory Relief

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Audrey Trewin

First Plaintiff

Stephen Albert Trewin

Second Plaintiff

Graeme John Felton

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Real Property Easements / Post Final Judgment, Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the replacement fence by the dominant owner must be commensurate with existing fencing
  2. 2 Whether dominant owners are restrained from removing remaining parts of the fence without first erecting a commensurate replacement

Ratio Decidendi

Dominant owners are required to replace inferior fencing with fencing commensurate to other boundaries before opening new access; restraints imposed on removal until compliance.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory orders granted restraining plaintiffs and requiring replacement fence; plaintiffs to pay defendant's costs.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs to replace the fence erected on or about 6 September 2007 with a paling fence commensurate in style and structure to the previous fence by 19 October 2007.
  • Plaintiffs restrained from removing any remaining part of the existing fence without first erecting an equivalent length of commensurate paling fence.