Lamond v Sulima [2010] NSWLEC 1330

Lamond v Sulima [2010] NSWLEC 1330

There was no evidence that the tree is likely to cause damage or injury in the next 12 months. None of the tests under s 10(2) of the Act were satisfied, and therefore the Court did not have jurisdiction to make orders regarding the tree.

Parties
Applicant: J & M Lamond; Respondent: J & G Sulima
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Disputes Between Neighbours, Tree Removal, Court Jurisdiction
Property Law Environmental Law Disputes Between Neighbours Tree Removal Court Jurisdiction

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J & M Lamond

Applicant

J & G Sulima

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tree is likely to cause damage to property or injury to persons in the near future
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have made reasonable efforts to reach agreement with the tree's owner
  3. 3 Whether the Court has jurisdiction to make an order regarding the tree

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence that the tree is likely to cause damage or injury in the next 12 months. None of the tests under s 10(2) of the Act were satisfied, and therefore the Court did not have jurisdiction to make orders regarding the tree.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.