Sorensen v Van Kleef [2017] NSWLEC 1667

Sorensen v Van Kleef [2017] NSWLEC 1667

Although the land had the character of rural residential land to which the Trees Act could apply and the applicant had made a reasonable effort to reach agreement, the trees were not shown to be trees planted so as to form a hedge within s 14A(1)(a). In any event, they were not currently severely obstructing...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under S14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Hearing; Principal Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['hedge' 'obstruction of Sunlight' 'obstruction of Views' 'land to Which the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Applies' 'trees to Which Part 2 a Applies' 'severity of Obstruction']
['trees Disputes Between Neighbours' 'environmental Planning' 'land and Environment'] ['hedge' 'obstruction of Sunlight' 'obstruction of Views' 'land to Which the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Applies' 'trees to Which Part 2 a Applies' 'severity of Obstruction']

Source-derived case record

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Under S14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Hearing; Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 applied to the land on which the respondent's trees were situated." 'Whether the trees were two or more trees planted so as to form a hedge and at least 2.5m above ground level for the purposes of s 14A(1)(a).' 'Whether the applicant had tried to reach an agreement with the respondent as required by s 14E(1).' "Whether the trees were severely obstructing sunlight to a window of the applicant's dwelling within s 14E(2)(a)(i)." "Whether the trees were severely obstructing a view from the applicant's dwelling within s 14E(2)(a)(ii)."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the land had the character of rural residential land to which the Trees Act could apply and the applicant had made a reasonable effort to reach agreement, the trees were not shown to be trees planted so as to form a hedge within s 14A(1)(a). In any event, they were not currently severely obstructing sunlight to windows and caused only a partial minor to moderate, not severe, obstruction of views from the applicant's dwelling, so the jurisdictional requirements for orders under Part 2A were not met.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']