Aldridge & anor v Pymble Golf Club [2008] NSWLEC 1467

Aldridge & anor v Pymble Golf Club [2008] NSWLEC 1467

The application was dismissed because the applicants did not satisfy the relevant s 10(2) tests. The trees were not presently causing damage, were not growing so that branches significantly overhung the applicants' property, were not likely to cause injury given proper management by the golf club, and the Court could not be satisfied that any damage would be caused to the applicants' property in the next 12 months or so.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['likely Damage in the Near Future' 'risk of Injury From Trees' 'neighbouring Trees' 'section 10 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006']
['trees Disputes Between Neighbours' 'land and Environment Court Jurisdiction'] ['likely Damage in the Near Future' 'risk of Injury From Trees' 'neighbouring Trees' 'section 10 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006']

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

Application Under the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court had jurisdiction under s 10(1) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 because an attempt had been made to resolve the matter between the parties.' "Whether the trees had caused, were causing, or were likely in the near future to cause damage to the applicants' property under s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006." 'Whether the trees were likely to cause injury to any person under s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the applicants did not satisfy the relevant s 10(2) tests. The trees were not presently causing damage, were not growing so that branches significantly overhung the applicants' property, were not likely to cause injury given proper management by the golf club, and the Court could not be satisfied that any damage would be caused to the applicants' property in the next 12 months or so.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']