Woo v Chan [2010] NSWLEC 1317

Woo v Chan [2010] NSWLEC 1317

The Court dismissed the application because there was insufficient evidence to prove a nexus between the remains of the stump and the condition of the driveway. No roots were shown under the slab or between the cracks, the landscape designer's report was given little if any weight as unsubstantiated opinion, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Application Pursuant to Part 2 S 7 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['damage to Property' 'compensation' 'concrete Driveway Damage' 'tree Roots' 'jurisdiction to Make Orders Under S 10(2)']
['trees (neighbours)' 'property Law'] ['damage to Property' 'compensation' 'concrete Driveway Damage' 'tree Roots' 'jurisdiction to Make Orders Under S 10(2)']

Source-derived case record

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Pursuant to Part 2 S 7 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the tree concerned has caused, is causing, or is likely in the near future to cause damage to the applicant's property or is likely to cause injury to any person under s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006." 'Whether compensation should be ordered for repair or replacement of the concrete driveway.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the application because there was insufficient evidence to prove a nexus between the remains of the stump and the condition of the driveway. No roots were shown under the slab or between the cracks, the landscape designer's report was given little if any weight as unsubstantiated opinion, and the Court was not satisfied that any of the s 10(2) tests were met, so it had no jurisdiction to make an order.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']