Kristeller v Matis [2012] NSWLEC 1027
The Court was satisfied, on the bare preponderance of probability, that the tree caused damage to the low brick boundary wall and slight sideways displacement of one section of the concrete path. However, liability for compensation was limited to 10% of the cost of rectification of the wall, corresponding to the period the respondent owned the property. No compensation was awarded for other elements of alleged damage for lack of sufficient causal nexus.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 February 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Class 2 Application Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Decision
- Outcome
- Application upheld in part; limited compensation payable
- Legal Topics
- ['trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006' 'damage to Property' 'compensation' 'apportionment' 'removal of Trees']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the respondent is liable for damage caused by trees formerly on her property to the applicant's property" 'Extent of compensation payable for proven damage' 'Causal nexus between trees and alleged damage']
Ratio Decidendi
The Court was satisfied, on the bare preponderance of probability, that the tree caused damage to the low brick boundary wall and slight sideways displacement of one section of the concrete path. However, liability for compensation was limited to 10% of the cost of rectification of the wall, corresponding to the period the respondent owned the property. No compensation was awarded for other elements of alleged damage for lack of sufficient causal nexus.
Court Disposition
Application upheld in part; limited compensation payable
Orders
- ['Applicant to obtain two quotes for removal and replacement of the displaced section of low brick dividing wall; respondent may obtain one quote.' 'Parties to agree on contractor; if no agreement, cheapest quote to be used.' 'Applicant to engage and pay nominated contractor.' "Respondent to allow access for quoting...
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