Keegan v Lay [2012] NSWLEC 1330
The evidence did not satisfy the Court that the tree caused damage to the original boundary fence or is likely to cause damage in the near future to house foundations or driveway. While roots may have caused minor cracks in the driveway, the damage is not significant, does not interfere with use, nor create any hazard. The Court's discretion under the Act is not exercised for orders in light of the minor damage.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 30 November 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['damage Caused by Trees' 'neighbour Disputes' 'jurisdictional Tests Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the tree caused damage to the boundary fence' 'Whether the tree caused or is causing damage to the driveway' 'Whether the tree is likely to cause damage in the near future to house foundations or driveway']
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence did not satisfy the Court that the tree caused damage to the original boundary fence or is likely to cause damage in the near future to house foundations or driveway. While roots may have caused minor cracks in the driveway, the damage is not significant, does not interfere with use, nor create any hazard. The Court's discretion under the Act is not exercised for orders in light of the minor damage.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed
Orders
- ['The application is dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment