NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Royle v Debelak [2020] NSWLEC 1354 Hearing dates: 29 July 2020 Date of orders: 11 August 2020 Decision date: 11 August 2020 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: O'Neill C Decision: The orders of the Court are: (1) The respondents are to prune the bamboo hedge along the southern boundary of their property to the height of the top of the chain wire tennis court fence located adjacent to the shared boundary on the applicant's property, at a height of approximately RL48.86. (2) The pruning is to be undertaken within 90 days of the date of these orders. (3) The respondents are to maintain the bamboo hedge pruned to a height not exceeding the height of the top of the chain wire tennis court fence on the adjacent property on a regular basis. (4) The exhibits, other than Exhibit A, are returned. Catchwords: TREES (NEIGHBOURS) – bamboo hedge – severe impact on views Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Cases Cited: Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) 134 LGERA 23; [2004] NSWLEC 140 Category: Principal judgment Parties: David William Royle (Applicant) Marc Milan Debelak (First Respondent) Suzanne Maree Debelak (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: P Clarke (Solicitor) (Applicant) S Latham (Solicitor) (Respondents)
Solicitors: Hones Lawyers (Applicant) Stuart Latham Solicitors (Respondents) File Number(s): 2020/126794 Publication restriction: No
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate