Madden v Symes [2007] NSWLEC 340

Orders in relation to the Angophera costata are not warranted since it does not pose risk of damage or injury under s 10(2). In relation to the Sydney Peppermint, the statutory test is met due to borer damage and risk of injury; therefore, court orders for partial removal/pruning are appropriate, subject to giving the respondent opportunity to be heard.

Parties: Applicant: Norman Madden; Respondent: Alan Symes
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 31 May 2007
Procedural Posture: Neighbour Application Trees / Ex Tempore Judgment Following Hearing
Outcome: Proposed orders for removal/pruning of parts of the Sydney Peppermint tree; respondent to be given 14 days to make submissions before orders finalised; no orders regarding Angophera costata.
Legal Topics: Tree Disputes, Neighbour Disputes

Environmental Law Property Law Tree Disputes 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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Norman Madden

Applicant

Alan Symes

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Neighbour Application Trees / Ex Tempore Judgment Following Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether trees on neighbouring property pose sufficient risk to justify Court orders under s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006
2 Which remedial orders, if any, should be issued in relation to the trees

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Proposed orders for removal/pruning of parts of the Sydney Peppermint tree; respondent to be given 14 days to make submissions before orders finalised; no orders regarding Angophera costata.

Orders

Work to be undertaken by Mr Symes at his expense
Work to be undertaken by an AQF level 3 arborist with appropriate insurances