Economos v Terrence [2025] NSWLEC 1078

The bamboo hedge is prescribed as a 'tree' forming a hedge under the Act, and it severely obstructs views from the applicant’s dwelling. The severity justifies an order to prune and maintain the hedge to a specified height, balancing privacy and landscape amenity for the respondent against the applicant’s interest in maintaining views.

Parties: Applicant: Peter Economos; Respondent: James Terrence
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 14 February 2025
Procedural Posture: Trees Dispute (neighbours) / Principal Judgment
Outcome: Application granted.
Legal Topics: Trees (disputes Between Neighbours), High Hedges, Views, Privacy

Property Law Environmental Law Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) High Hedges Views Privacy

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Peter Economos

Applicant

James Terrence

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Trees Dispute (neighbours) / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the bamboo hedge constitutes a hedge under the Act
2 Whether the hedge severely obstructs views from the applicant’s dwelling
3 Balancing the interests of the applicant and respondent regarding pruning the hedge

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application granted.

Orders

Prune and maintain the bamboo hedge inside the respondent's eastern boundary to a height level with 5 metres above ground (or 3.5 metres above the Colorbond fence), uniform along the boundary following the slope.
Initial pruning to occur within 30 days; height maintained by pruning twice a year, mid-spring and mid-autumn.