Salisbury v Harrison & anor [2015] NSWLEC 1298

Salisbury v Harrison & anor [2015] NSWLEC 1298

The Pear trees did not cause a severe obstruction from any nominated viewpoint. The Viburnum hedge most substantially obstructed the view only from a seated position in the Family/Dining room, while much of the harbour and headland view remained visible from a standing position. The Court was not satisfied to the required degree that the Viburnum hedge severely obstructed the applicant's view; and, even if it did, the balancing matters including the limited seated-only obstruction, privacy and garden amenity for the respondents meant the Court had no power to make the orders sought.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under S 14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Concerning Hedge Trees Allegedly Obstructing Views / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The application is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['hedge Trees' 'obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'balancing of Interests' 'jurisdictional Tests for Orders']
['trees Disputes Between Neighbours' 'land and Environment' 'property'] ['hedge Trees' 'obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'balancing of Interests' 'jurisdictional Tests for Orders']

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

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Under S 14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Concerning Hedge Trees Allegedly Obstructing Views / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Viburnum and Pear trees formed hedges to which Part 14A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 applied.' "Whether the trees severely obstructed views from the applicant's dwelling." "Whether the applicant's interest in removal or reduction of the obstruction outweighed matters suggesting the undesirability of disturbing or interfering with the trees." 'Whether orders should be made requiring pruning and ongoing maintenance of the trees at approximately 2.3 metres.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Pear trees did not cause a severe obstruction from any nominated viewpoint. The Viburnum hedge most substantially obstructed the view only from a seated position in the Family/Dining room, while much of the harbour and headland view remained visible from a standing position. The Court was not satisfied to the required degree that the Viburnum hedge severely obstructed the applicant's view; and, even if it did, the balancing matters including the limited seated-only obstruction, privacy and garden amenity for the respondents meant the Court had no power to make the orders sought.

Court Disposition

The application is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']