Samitz & Samitz v Connolly & Turnbull [2016] NSWCATCD 24
The dividing fence was insufficient. The most cost-effective and suitable quotation for a new treated pine paling fence was provided by Local Fencing. Both parties must share equally in the cost of fencing and survey. The fence line must be cleared for works, and the fence constructed per the contractor's quote within three months.
- Parties
- Applicant: H P & R M Samitz; Respondent: J Connolly and L Turnbull
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 03 March 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Tribunal Application / Final Decision
- Outcome
- orders made for construction of new dividing fence and apportionment of costs
- Legal Topics
- Dividing Fences, Contribution to Fencing Costs
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
H P & R M Samitz
Applicant
J Connolly and L Turnbull
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Application / Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the existing dividing fence is sufficient under the Dividing Fences Act 1991
- 2 How costs for new fence and survey report should be apportioned
- 3 Which contractor's quote should be accepted for the fencing work
Ratio Decidendi
The dividing fence was insufficient. The most cost-effective and suitable quotation for a new treated pine paling fence was provided by Local Fencing. Both parties must share equally in the cost of fencing and survey. The fence line must be cleared for works, and the fence constructed per the contractor's quote within three months.
Court Disposition
orders made for construction of new dividing fence and apportionment of costs
Orders
- A treated pine single paling fence is to be built in accordance with the quotation from Local Fencing dated 20 January 2016 on or before 1 April 2016. Fence is 25 m x 1.8 Treated Pine Paling.
- Parties to share the cost of the fence equally.
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