Akerman v Neal [2016] NSWLEC 1298
Although the parties agreed that the statutory hedge provisions applied to the 8 Leyland Cypress trees, the Court found that the obstruction from the nominated viewpoints was minor to moderate at most and not severe. Because the trees were not severely obstructing the views at the time of the hearing, the jurisdictional threshold for making orders was not met and the application was dismissed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 July 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Class 2 Application Under S 14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Concerning Leyland Cypress Trees / Principal Judgment After Hearing
- Outcome
- The application is dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['hedge' 'obstruction of Views' 'privacy' 'jurisdiction']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Under S 14 B Part 2 a of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Concerning Leyland Cypress Trees / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the 8 Leyland Cypress trees were planted so as to form a hedge and rose to a height of at least 2.5 metres.' "Whether the trees were severely obstructing views from the applicant's dwelling at the time of the hearing." "Whether the applicant's interest in having the obstruction removed, remedied or restrained outweighed matters suggesting the undesirability of disturbing or interfering with the trees."]
Ratio Decidendi
Although the parties agreed that the statutory hedge provisions applied to the 8 Leyland Cypress trees, the Court found that the obstruction from the nominated viewpoints was minor to moderate at most and not severe. Because the trees were not severely obstructing the views at the time of the hearing, the jurisdictional threshold for making orders was not met and the application was dismissed.
Court Disposition
The application is dismissed.
Orders
- ['The application is dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment