Schou v Gonsalves [2011] NSWLEC 1174

Schou v Gonsalves [2011] NSWLEC 1174

The severity and nature of any obstruction by the trees does not warrant interference because neither obstruction of sunlight nor view was found to be severe, and the balancing exercise under the Act did not favour pruning or maintenance orders.

Parties
Applicant: Ms R Schou; First Respondent: Mr M Gonsalves; Second Respondent: Ms D Gonsalves
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Application Pursuant to Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Determination
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Trees and Hedges, Obstruction of Sunlight, Obstruction of Views, Neighbour Disputes
Property Law Environmental Law Trees and Hedges Obstruction of Sunlight Obstruction of Views Neighbour Disputes

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms R Schou

Applicant

Mr M Gonsalves

First Respondent

Ms D Gonsalves

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Pursuant to Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Leyland Cypress trees are severely obstructing sunlight to windows of the applicant's dwelling
  2. 2 Whether the Leyland Cypress trees are severely obstructing a view from the applicant's dwelling
  3. 3 Whether the severity and nature of any obstruction outweighs other matters to be considered under s 14F of the Act

Ratio Decidendi

The severity and nature of any obstruction by the trees does not warrant interference because neither obstruction of sunlight nor view was found to be severe, and the balancing exercise under the Act did not favour pruning or maintenance orders.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.