Wei v Clifton [2014] NSWLEC 1227

Wei v Clifton [2014] NSWLEC 1227

The Fig tree was a single specimen, and the Liquidambar was at least 10 metres away and separated from it by two sheds. The Fig and Liquidambar were individual specimens and would not be perceived as a hedge. Because the tree the subject of the application was not a tree to which Part 2A applied, the Court had no jurisdiction to consider the matter further and the application had to be dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under S 14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['hedge' 'obstruction of Views' 'obstruction of Sunlight' 'jurisdiction Under Part 2 A']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Under S 14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment

  1. 1 ['Whether Part 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between neighbours) Act 2006 applied to the tree or trees in question.' 'Whether the Fig tree and the Liquidambar were planted so as to form a hedge.' 'Whether the Court had jurisdiction to consider the application further.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Fig tree was a single specimen, and the Liquidambar was at least 10 metres away and separated from it by two sheds. The Fig and Liquidambar were individual specimens and would not be perceived as a hedge. Because the tree the subject of the application was not a tree to which Part 2A applied, the Court had no jurisdiction to consider the matter further and the application had to be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']