Chinnock v Kitson [2012] NSWLEC 1061

Chinnock v Kitson [2012] NSWLEC 1061

Although both the Lillypilly hedge and the Photinia hedge met the hedge criteria in s 14A(1), neither severely obstructed a view from the applicant's dwelling. The Lillypilly hedge did not severely obstruct any view, and the Photinia hedge caused only minor obstruction from seated positions and at most negligible impact from standing positions. Because s 14E(2)(a)(ii) was not satisfied, the Court could not make pruning or maintenance orders under the Trees Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Pursuant to S 14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['hedges' 'obstruction of Views' 'pruning Orders' 'jurisdiction Under Part 2 A']
['land and Environment' 'trees Disputes Between Neighbours'] ['hedges' 'obstruction of Views' 'pruning Orders' 'jurisdiction Under Part 2 A']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Pursuant to S 14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the two groups of trees were hedges for the purpose of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006.' "Whether the hedges severely obstructed a view from the applicant's dwelling at the time of the hearing." 'Whether the Court had power to order pruning and ongoing maintenance of the hedges.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although both the Lillypilly hedge and the Photinia hedge met the hedge criteria in s 14A(1), neither severely obstructed a view from the applicant's dwelling. The Lillypilly hedge did not severely obstruct any view, and the Photinia hedge caused only minor obstruction from seated positions and at most negligible impact from standing positions. Because s 14E(2)(a)(ii) was not satisfied, the Court could not make pruning or maintenance orders under the Trees Act.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']