Sendro v Goodings [2020] NSWLEC 1370

Sendro v Goodings [2020] NSWLEC 1370

The trees in dispute do not constitute a hedge within the meaning of s 14A(1) of the Act because they are not a group of trees planted to form a hedge; furthermore, the circumstances have not materially changed since the previous determination, thus barring a re-application under the Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Application Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment Extemporaneous Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['trees (disputes Between Neighbours)' 'jurisdictional Requirements for Hedge Applications' 'high Hedges' 'definition of Hedge' 'repeat Applications Under the Trees Act']
['environmental Law' 'property Law'] ['trees (disputes Between Neighbours)' 'jurisdictional Requirements for Hedge Applications' 'high Hedges' 'definition of Hedge' 'repeat Applications Under the Trees Act']

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 Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Principal Judgment Extemporaneous Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trees on the respondents' property constitute a hedge for the purposes of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006" 'Whether the application is barred due to unchanged circumstances from a previous application']

Ratio Decidendi

The trees in dispute do not constitute a hedge within the meaning of s 14A(1) of the Act because they are not a group of trees planted to form a hedge; furthermore, the circumstances have not materially changed since the previous determination, thus barring a re-application under the Act.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']