Lowe v Gottlieb [2014] NSWLEC 1260

Lowe v Gottlieb [2014] NSWLEC 1260

The Court found that the trees did not cause a severe obstruction of the applicants’ view, as the iconic elements (harbour, bridge, opera house, CBD) remained visible and any obstruction was not severe within the meaning of the Act; accordingly, no pruning orders could be made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Tree Dispute Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['tree Disputes' 'views Obstruction' 'hedges']
['property Law' 'environmental Law'] ['tree Disputes' 'views Obstruction' 'hedges']

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

Tree Dispute Under Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the hedge formed by the respondents’ trees causes a severe obstruction of the applicants’ view within the meaning of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the trees did not cause a severe obstruction of the applicants’ view, as the iconic elements (harbour, bridge, opera house, CBD) remained visible and any obstruction was not severe within the meaning of the Act; accordingly, no pruning orders could be made.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']