Lovering v Bromage [2023] NSWLEC 1029

Lovering v Bromage [2023] NSWLEC 1029

Branches fallen from the Respondent's trees have caused and are likely to cause further damage to the Applicant's property, and the trunk base and roots of certain trees are causing damage to a retaining wall. Removal of Trees 1 and 2, and pruning of Tree 3, are necessary to remedy this, and apportionment of costs is justified by the respective responsibilities of the parties and the history of the trees and buildings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Application / Final Determination and Orders
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
['tree Disputes Between Neighbours' 'damage to Property From Trees' 'negligence' 'apportionment of Costs' 'duty of Care' 'pruning and Removal of Trees']
['environmental Law' 'property Law' 'torts'] ['tree Disputes Between Neighbours' 'damage to Property From Trees' 'negligence' 'apportionment of Costs' 'duty of Care' 'pruning and Removal of Trees']

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

Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Application / Final Determination and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trees on the Respondent's property caused or are likely to cause damage to the Applicant's property or injury to any person within the meaning of s 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006" 'Whether removal or pruning of the trees is appropriate to remedy or prevent such damage or injury' 'Apportionment of costs for remedial actions between the parties']

Ratio Decidendi

Branches fallen from the Respondent's trees have caused and are likely to cause further damage to the Applicant's property, and the trunk base and roots of certain trees are causing damage to a retaining wall. Removal of Trees 1 and 2, and pruning of Tree 3, are necessary to remedy this, and apportionment of costs is justified by the respective responsibilities of the parties and the history of the trees and buildings.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • ['Respondent to remove Tree 1 and Tree 2 within 45 days, including stump grinding to 300mm below ground level, at her expense.' 'Respondent to prune Tree 3 within 45 days, removing all dead branches >20mm diameter and specific live branch, at her expense.' 'All works to be completed by AQF level 3 arborists with...