Woodbridge v Degabrielle [2021] NSWCATAP 352

Woodbridge v Degabrielle [2021] NSWCATAP 352

The Appeal Panel found no error of law or fact in the primary Tribunal's determination that privacy concerns outweighed amenity of view and supported the order for a 1.8m high dividing fence; the appeal grounds did not establish any substantial miscarriage of justice or error warranting interference with the decision.

Parties
First Appellant: Dean Woodbridge; Second Appellant: Yasmin Woodbridge; Respondent: Marie Rosalie Degabrielle
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fences and Boundaries, Dividing Fence, Privacy
Environment and Planning Fences and Boundaries Dividing Fence Privacy

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dean Woodbridge

First Appellant

Yasmin Woodbridge

Second Appellant

Marie Rosalie Degabrielle

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the primary member erred in not considering reduced view as required by Dividing Fences Act 1991 (NSW) s 4
  2. 2 Whether taking into account development consents was an error of law or fact
  3. 3 Whether the finding about usual fence height in the locality was erroneous

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel found no error of law or fact in the primary Tribunal's determination that privacy concerns outweighed amenity of view and supported the order for a 1.8m high dividing fence; the appeal grounds did not establish any substantial miscarriage of justice or error warranting interference with the decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.