Nasr v Kassiri [2020] NSWCATCD 12
The Tribunal was not satisfied to the civil standard that the fence was insufficient merely because parts were not on the boundary line. Considering all the circumstances, the deviations were minor and towards the rear of the property, there had been no dispute about the boundary for three years, the respondent had installed a gate and garden beds in reliance on the fence location, and the fence was otherwise in good repair apart from minor damage caused by the applicant.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 29 January 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Claim Pursuant to the Dividing Fences Act 1991 (nsw) for Fencing Work on the Boundary Line of Adjoining Properties / Final Decision After Hearing
- Outcome
- The claim is dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['sufficient Dividing Fence' 'fencing Notice' 'boundary Encroachment' 'retaining Wall']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Claim Pursuant to the Dividing Fences Act 1991 (nsw) for Fencing Work on the Boundary Line of Adjoining Properties / Final Decision After Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether there is a sufficient dividing fence if the fence is not on the boundary line.' 'Whether a new fence and retaining wall should be erected on the boundary.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal was not satisfied to the civil standard that the fence was insufficient merely because parts were not on the boundary line. Considering all the circumstances, the deviations were minor and towards the rear of the property, there had been no dispute about the boundary for three years, the respondent had installed a gate and garden beds in reliance on the fence location, and the fence was otherwise in good repair apart from minor damage caused by the applicant.
Court Disposition
The claim is dismissed.
Orders
- ['The claim 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