Harrison v Williams [2009] NSWLEC 1337

Harrison v Williams [2009] NSWLEC 1337

The Court found no damage or likely near-future damage to the retaining wall, and that alleged drainage damage concerned Ms Williams' property rather than the applicants' property. Some minor damage to guttering, property and the house, and past fence damage, met aspects of s 10(2)(a), and trees 1 to 4 were likely to damage the fibro fence in the near future; however, those matters could be addressed by ordinary maintenance or pruning and did not justify removal or significant interference. The trees were not found likely to cause injury under s 10(2)(b). The Court nevertheless made consent orders because the parties agreed to removal and replacement planting, Council officers indicated...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Ex Tempore Judgment and Consent Orders
Outcome
Application upheld in part; consent orders made.
Legal Topics
['replacement Tree Planting' 'phases' 'removal of Trees' 'risk of Damage to Property' 'risk of Injury to Persons']
['trees (neighbours)' 'property Law'] ['replacement Tree Planting' 'phases' 'removal of Trees' 'risk of Damage to Property' 'risk of Injury to Persons']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the nine Cypress trees caused, were causing, or were likely in the near future to cause damage to the applicants' property." 'Whether the trees were likely to cause injury to any person.' 'Whether any damage or risk justified orders for removal or other intervention under the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006.' 'Whether consent orders should be made for removal of the trees and replacement planting.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found no damage or likely near-future damage to the retaining wall, and that alleged drainage damage concerned Ms Williams' property rather than the applicants' property. Some minor damage to guttering, property and the house, and past fence damage, met aspects of s 10(2)(a), and trees 1 to 4 were likely to damage the fibro fence in the near future; however, those matters could be addressed by ordinary maintenance or pruning and did not justify removal or significant interference. The trees were not found likely to cause injury under s 10(2)(b). The Court nevertheless made consent orders because the parties agreed to removal and replacement planting, Council officers indicated...

Court Disposition

Application upheld in part; consent orders made.

Orders

  • ['These orders apply to 55 Gore Street, Port Macquarie, and 12 Allambie Place, Port Macquarie.' "The cut branches in Ms Williams's backyard shall be removed to the Harrisons' property or another appropriate location, at the Harrisons' cost by 18 November 2009." "The nine trees shall be cut to within 50 mm of ground...