Doerner & anor v Vincent [2015] NSWLEC 1186

Doerner & anor v Vincent [2015] NSWLEC 1186

Although the trees were a hedge to which Part 2A applied and the applicants had made reasonable efforts to reach agreement, the Court found that the trees were not severely obstructing a view from the applicants' dwelling: impacts from V1, V2, V3 and the laundry window were negligible to minor, and impacts from terrace areas were moderate but constrained by other factors. The applicants also did not establish that the trees severely obstructed sunlight to the bedroom windows, particularly given the orientation, the fence, and other structures. Because s 14E(2) was not satisfied, the Court's jurisdiction to make orders was not engaged and the application was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Determination After Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['hedge' 'views' 'sunlight' 'severe Obstruction' 'neighbouring Trees']
['land and Environment' 'trees Disputes Between Neighbours'] ['hedge' 'views' 'sunlight' 'severe Obstruction' 'neighbouring Trees']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Under Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Determination After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent's row of Leyland Cypress trees was a hedge to which Part 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 applied." 'Whether the applicants had made a reasonable effort to reach agreement with the respondent.' "Whether the trees were severely obstructing a view from the applicants' dwelling." "Whether the trees were severely obstructing sunlight to a window of the applicants' dwelling." 'Whether the severity and nature of any obstruction justified orders interfering with the trees.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the trees were a hedge to which Part 2A applied and the applicants had made reasonable efforts to reach agreement, the Court found that the trees were not severely obstructing a view from the applicants' dwelling: impacts from V1, V2, V3 and the laundry window were negligible to minor, and impacts from terrace areas were moderate but constrained by other factors. The applicants also did not establish that the trees severely obstructed sunlight to the bedroom windows, particularly given the orientation, the fence, and other structures. Because s 14E(2) was not satisfied, the Court's jurisdiction to make orders was not engaged and the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']