Jones v Stephenson [2020] NSWLEC 154

Jones v Stephenson [2020] NSWLEC 154

The applicants proved beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent failed to comply with Order 3 by not pruning trees 2, 3 and 4 in April 2020, but did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the trees had not later been pruned to the required height. The contempt was unintentional, not serious, had been purged by later pruning, and no actual loss of sunlight was proved, so no conviction or penalty was warranted. Because the proceedings were reasonably commenced and the applicants established part of the contempt case, the respondent was ordered to pay recoverable costs of $342 within 60 days.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Contempt Proceedings Arising From Orders Under the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (nsw) / Amended Notice of Motion Dated 29 August 2020 Seeking Conviction, Penalty and Costs for Contempt
Outcome
Civil contempt for failure to prune in April 2020 established; contempt for failure to maintain the specified height not proven beyond reasonable doubt; no conviction or penalty imposed; costs awarded to the applicants.
Legal Topics
['failure to Comply With Court Order' 'pruning of Trees' 'civil Contempt' 'proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt' 'sentencing for Contempt' 'costs of Motion']
['contempt' 'land and Environment' 'neighbouring Trees Disputes' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['failure to Comply With Court Order' 'pruning of Trees' 'civil Contempt' 'proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt' 'sentencing for Contempt' 'costs of Motion']

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

Class 2 Contempt Proceedings Arising From Orders Under the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (nsw) / Amended Notice of Motion Dated 29 August 2020 Seeking Conviction, Penalty and Costs for Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondent was guilty of contempt by failing to prune trees 2, 3 and 4 in April 2020 as required by Order 3 made on 30 January 2017.' 'Whether the respondent was guilty of contempt by failing to maintain trees 2, 3 and 4 at the height specified in Order 3.' 'Whether any conviction, fine or other penalty should be imposed for any proven contempt.' 'Whether the applicants should be awarded costs of the amended notice of motion.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants proved beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent failed to comply with Order 3 by not pruning trees 2, 3 and 4 in April 2020, but did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the trees had not later been pruned to the required height. The contempt was unintentional, not serious, had been purged by later pruning, and no actual loss of sunlight was proved, so no conviction or penalty was warranted. Because the proceedings were reasonably commenced and the applicants established part of the contempt case, the respondent was ordered to pay recoverable costs of $342 within 60 days.

Court Disposition

Civil contempt for failure to prune in April 2020 established; contempt for failure to maintain the specified height not proven beyond reasonable doubt; no conviction or penalty imposed; costs awarded to the applicants.

Orders

  • ["The Respondent is to pay the Applicants' costs of the amended notice of motion dated 29 August 2020 in the amount of $342 within 60 days of this judgment."]