Kennedy v Quinn [2023] NSWLEC 1059

The applicant's contractors most likely caused the death of the tree through herbicide, making it reasonable for the applicant to bear the costs of removal; removal is necessary as the dead tree poses a likely risk of injury within the near future.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 06 February 2023
Procedural Posture: Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Orders
Outcome: Application granted with specific orders; applicant to bear costs.
Legal Topics: ['tree Disputes Between Neighbours' 'injury Risk From Trees' 'cost Responsibility for Tree Removal']

['environmental Law'] ['tree Disputes Between Neighbours' 'injury Risk From Trees' 'cost Responsibility for Tree Removal']

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

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether a dead tree on the respondents' property is likely to cause injury to people on the applicant's property" 'If the tree should be removed under the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006' 'Who should bear the cost of tree removal']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application granted with specific orders; applicant to bear costs.

Orders

["The applicant must obtain, at his expense, a report from a qualified geotechnical engineer regarding the likely impacts of tree removal on the adjacent building's footings and provide it to the respondents within 30 days." "The applicant must engage and pay a suitably qualified and insured arborist to remove the...