Chambers v Graham [2020] NSWLEC 1457

Chambers v Graham [2020] NSWLEC 1457

The hedge does not severely obstruct sunlight to the applicant's windows; the applicant did not lose access to sunlight previously enjoyed since the situation existed from the outset of ownership. Therefore, jurisdictional requirements of s 14E(2)(a) are not met and the Court cannot make orders interfering with the hedge.

Parties
Applicant: Michael Chambers; Respondent: Simon Graham
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours Act) 2006 (nsw) / Final Determination
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Trees Disputes Between Neighbours, Obstruction of Sunlight, Hedge Height Regulation
Property Law Environmental Law Trees Disputes Between Neighbours Obstruction of Sunlight Hedge Height Regulation

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Chambers

Applicant

Simon Graham

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the neighbouring hedge severely obstructs sunlight to the applicant's windows
  2. 2 Whether the applicant lost access to sunlight previously enjoyed
  3. 3 Whether the applicant made reasonable effort to resolve the issue

Ratio Decidendi

The hedge does not severely obstruct sunlight to the applicant's windows; the applicant did not lose access to sunlight previously enjoyed since the situation existed from the outset of ownership. Therefore, jurisdictional requirements of s 14E(2)(a) are not met and the Court cannot make orders interfering with the hedge.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • The application is refused.