Say & anor v Antal [2016] NSWLEC 1493

Say & anor v Antal [2016] NSWLEC 1493

Although the Court's jurisdiction was engaged due to probable involvement of the respondent's trees in past sewer blockage, the applicants did not establish that future damage is likely within the near future or that the trees are responsible for cracks in the concrete slab, so no orders for removal or intervention were justified.

Parties
Applicants: Virginia & Lesley Say; Respondent: Michael Antal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Tree Disputes, Damage to Property, Sewer Damage
Environmental Law Property Law Tree Disputes Damage to Property Sewer Damage

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Virginia & Lesley Say

Applicants

Michael Antal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trees on the respondent's property caused, are causing, or are likely in the near future to cause, damage to the applicants' property

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Court's jurisdiction was engaged due to probable involvement of the respondent's trees in past sewer blockage, the applicants did not establish that future damage is likely within the near future or that the trees are responsible for cracks in the concrete slab, so no orders for removal or intervention were justified.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.