Cooper v Clayton [2020] NSWLEC 1114

Cooper v Clayton [2020] NSWLEC 1114

The six Lilypily trees formed a hedge within s 14A(1), the applicant had made a reasonable attempt to reach agreement, and the hedge severely obstructed regional and water views from living rooms and adjacent verandas of dwellings on the applicant's land. After considering the matters in s 14F, minor pruning would regain the applicant's views while retaining most privacy, landscape amenity and ecological benefits for the respondents, so the applicant's interest in remedying the obstruction outweighed the undesirability of limited interference with the trees.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment; Orders Made After on Site Hearing
Outcome
Application successful; pruning and maintenance orders made with the applicant to reimburse 50% of pruning costs.
Legal Topics
['high Hedges' 'view Obstruction' 'privacy' 'pruning Orders' 'cost Sharing for Tree Works']
['trees Disputes Between Neighbours' 'land and Environment Court Proceedings'] ['high Hedges' 'view Obstruction' 'privacy' 'pruning Orders' 'cost Sharing for Tree Works']

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 Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment; Orders Made After on Site Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Lilypily trees formed a hedge for the purpose of s 14A(1) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006.' 'Whether the applicant made a reasonable attempt to reach agreement with the owners of the land on which the trees were situated.' "Whether the hedge severely obstructed views from a dwelling on the applicant's land under s 14E(2)(a)(ii)." "Whether the applicant's interest in having the obstruction removed, remedied or restrained outweighed matters suggesting the undesirability of disturbing or interfering with the trees." 'What pruning and maintenance orders should be made, and how costs should be allocated.']

Ratio Decidendi

The six Lilypily trees formed a hedge within s 14A(1), the applicant had made a reasonable attempt to reach agreement, and the hedge severely obstructed regional and water views from living rooms and adjacent verandas of dwellings on the applicant's land. After considering the matters in s 14F, minor pruning would regain the applicant's views while retaining most privacy, landscape amenity and ecological benefits for the respondents, so the applicant's interest in remedying the obstruction outweighed the undesirability of limited interference with the trees.

Court Disposition

Application successful; pruning and maintenance orders made with the applicant to reimburse 50% of pruning costs.

Orders

  • ['Within 60 days of the date of the orders, the respondent shall determine the height at which Tree 8, at the eastern end of the hedge, is to be pruned by projecting a horizontal line from the top rail of the balcony of either of the two eastern most apartments to the tree (1.05m above the deck floor level).'...