Jeong v Tse & Anor [2010] NSWLEC 1109
Three of the four tests in s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 are satisfied: dead branches have caused and could continue to cause property damage, and are likely to cause injury. Removal of the tree is warranted, but compensation is refused due to non-compliance with procedural directions.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 May 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Tree Dispute / Judgment
- Outcome
- Tree removal application allowed; compensation application dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['tree Disputes Between Neighbours' 'damage to Property' 'personal Injury' 'compensation' 'removal Orders']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Tree Dispute / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the tree caused or is likely to cause damage to property or injury to persons' 'Whether compensation should be awarded for alleged damage to property']
Ratio Decidendi
Three of the four tests in s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 are satisfied: dead branches have caused and could continue to cause property damage, and are likely to cause injury. Removal of the tree is warranted, but compensation is refused due to non-compliance with procedural directions.
Court Disposition
Tree removal application allowed; compensation application dismissed.
Orders
- ['Application to remove the tree is allowed.' 'Application for compensation is dismissed.' 'Owners of the tree to engage and pay for an AQF level 3 arborist to remove the tree to a minimum height of 6 m, and remove all lateral branches from remaining trunk.' 'Work to comply with WorkCover Code of Practice for the...
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