Sellick v Lyons [2024] NSWLEC 1702

Sellick v Lyons [2024] NSWLEC 1702

The Court found that Trees 1, 2 and 3 had caused, and were likely in the near future to cause, damage to the applicant's property, and reasonable efforts to reach agreement had been made. Orders were appropriate for the pruning and removal of certain trees and maintenance of clearance between the trees and the applicant's dwelling. The respondent is to bear the cost of these works.

Parties
Applicant: Steven William Sellick; Respondent: Cindy Lee Lyons
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Neighbouring Trees Dispute / Final Orders
Outcome
Application granted to the extent of specified orders
Legal Topics
Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006, Damage Caused by Neighbouring Trees, Orders for Tree Removal and Pruning
Environmental Law Property Law Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Damage Caused by Neighbouring Trees Orders for Tree Removal and Pruning

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven William Sellick

Applicant

Cindy Lee Lyons

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Neighbouring Trees Dispute / Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether trees on adjoining land have caused or are likely to cause damage to applicant's property
  2. 2 Whether pruning or removal of trees is justified to prevent future damage
  3. 3 Reasonableness of efforts to resolve the dispute between neighbours

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that Trees 1, 2 and 3 had caused, and were likely in the near future to cause, damage to the applicant's property, and reasonable efforts to reach agreement had been made. Orders were appropriate for the pruning and removal of certain trees and maintenance of clearance between the trees and the applicant's dwelling. The respondent is to bear the cost of these works.

Court Disposition

Application granted to the extent of specified orders

Orders

  • The respondent is to engage and pay for a suitably qualified and experienced arborist (minimum AQF level 3), with all appropriate insurances, to remove two banksias (Tree 1 and Tree 3) to no more than 3 metres above ground level, and prune the lemon-scented tea tree (Tree 2) to provide at least one metre of...
  • Thereafter, while any of Trees 1–3 remain, the respondent is to engage and pay for a suitably qualified arborist to prune them every two years in November to provide at least one metre clearance.