Treeves v Hedge [2010] NSWLEC 1344

Treeves v Hedge [2010] NSWLEC 1344

The applicant established on the balance of probabilities that roots from the respondents' fig tree caused damage to plumbing (blockage of sewer), thereby enlivening the Court's jurisdiction under the Trees Act to award compensation and orders for remediation, but not all claimed damage or costs were proven or reasonable; compensation was limited to the costs directly related to the proven damage and necessary rectification.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application upheld in part; various orders for reimbursement and remediation made; some claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
['tree Disputes' 'neighbour Disputes' 'damage to Property' 'compensation for Damage by Trees']
['property Law' 'tort Law'] ['tree Disputes' 'neighbour Disputes' 'damage to Property' 'compensation for Damage by Trees']

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

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether roots of trees on respondents' property caused damage to applicant's property" 'Entitlement of applicant to compensation for past and future costs related to alleged damage' 'Admissibility and weight of expert evidence not complying with Expert Witness Code of Conduct']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established on the balance of probabilities that roots from the respondents' fig tree caused damage to plumbing (blockage of sewer), thereby enlivening the Court's jurisdiction under the Trees Act to award compensation and orders for remediation, but not all claimed damage or costs were proven or reasonable; compensation was limited to the costs directly related to the proven damage and necessary rectification.

Court Disposition

Application upheld in part; various orders for reimbursement and remediation made; some claims dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Respondents to reimburse applicant $2185 for specific incurred costs within 30 days.' 'Respondents to pay for removal and poisoning of fig tree stump within 30 days.' 'Applicant to arrange and pay for root removal along concrete path; respondents to reimburse up to $700 upon invoice.' 'Application to remove...