Schutz v Kotsis [2010] NSWLEC 1332

Schutz v Kotsis [2010] NSWLEC 1332

Only Tree 3 presented a risk of injury to any person within the meaning of s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006. Other trees did not meet the statutory threshold for likely injury or damage to property in the near future, especially since a number of problematic trees had been removed before the hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Tree Dispute Application / Ex Tempore Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application upheld in part.
Legal Topics
['tree Disputes' 'damage to Property' 'injury to Person' 'rural Residential Zone']
['environmental Law' 'property Law'] ['tree Disputes' 'damage to Property' 'injury to Person' 'rural Residential Zone']

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

Tree Dispute Application / Ex Tempore Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trees on the respondent's property have caused, are causing, or are likely to cause damage to the applicant's property or injury to any person within the meaning of section 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006" 'Appropriate remedies regarding removal or pruning of trees and soil removal']

Ratio Decidendi

Only Tree 3 presented a risk of injury to any person within the meaning of s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006. Other trees did not meet the statutory threshold for likely injury or damage to property in the near future, especially since a number of problematic trees had been removed before the hearing.

Court Disposition

Application upheld in part.

Orders

  • ['The application to remove the trees is upheld in part.' 'The application for pruning of tops and overhanging branches is dismissed.' 'The application for the removal of soil is dismissed.' 'The respondent is to engage and pay for an AQF level 3 arborist to remove Tree 3.' 'The work is to be carried out in...