Lau v Gould [2021] NSWLEC 1566

Lau v Gould [2021] NSWLEC 1566

The application was refused as the evidence did not establish that the hedge was causing a severe obstruction of a view from the applicant’s dwelling as required under Pt 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006.

Parties
Applicant: Man Yi Lau; Respondent: Jody Gould
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Part 2 a / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Trees (disputes Between Neighbours), Hedge Obstruction, Jurisdiction Under Pt 2 a, View Obstruction
Environmental Law Property Law Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Hedge Obstruction Jurisdiction Under Pt 2 a View Obstruction

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Man Yi Lau

Applicant

Jody Gould

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Part 2 a / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hedge forms a severe obstruction of a view from the applicant's dwelling within the meaning of Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006, Pt 2A
  2. 2 Whether reasonable effort was made to reach agreement between neighbours
  3. 3 Whether orders under Pt 2A can be made for hedge management related to obstruction of a driveway rather than a view

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused as the evidence did not establish that the hedge was causing a severe obstruction of a view from the applicant’s dwelling as required under Pt 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • The application is refused.
  • The exhibits are returned, except for Exhibit A.