Pollachini v Estate of the late Peter Dimitropoulos [2020] NSWLEC 1463

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Pollachini v Estate of the late Peter Dimitropoulos [2020] NSWLEC 1463 Hearing dates: 6 August 2020 Decision date: 29 September 2020 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: Douglas AC Decision: See orders at [45] below. Catchwords: TREES (DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS) – tree causing damage to driveway and fence – whether damage to house is caused by the tree Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Cases Cited: Smith & Hannaford v Zhang & Zhou [2011] NSWLEC 29 Stevens v Russell [2016] NSWLEC 1233 Yang v Scerri [2007] NSWLEC 592 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Christine Pollachini (Applicant) Estate of the late Peter Dimitropoulos (First Respondent) Koralia Dimitropoulos (Second Respondent) Representation: C Pollachini (Litigant in person) (Applicant) A Dimitropoulos (Agent) (Respondents) File Number(s): 2020/157642 Publication restriction: No

Judgment

Background 1. The applicant, Ms Pollachini, shares a side boundary with a property owned by the respondents, Ms Koralia Dimitropoulos and the Estate of the Late Peter Dimitropoulos, in Croydon. The respondents' property is leased to tenants. Ms Pollachini occupies her residence, and she has owned the property for about eight years. The dispute has been ongoing since 2018, and Ms Pollachini has alerted the respondents, and their real estate agent (the agent), on many occasions, to damage allegedly caused by the tree. 2. As the applicant's claims remained unaddressed, Ms Pollachini commenced proceedings in 2020, pursuant to s 7 of Part 2 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act), in order to remedy damage that a Cinnamomum camphora (Camphor laurel) (the tree) has caused, is causing, and is likely to cause in the near future. She also claimed that the tree represented a serious risk of injury. 3. Based on photographs in the case file, the tree was about seven metres tall, with a canopy spread of approximately 4-5 metres, and trunk diameter at ground level of about 375mm. Not long before the onsite hearing, the tree's trunk and canopy were removed, leaving the stump protruding above ground level by about 75mm. This trunk base is located directly adjacent to the parties' shared timber paling boundary fence, and as the trunk base thickened, it had bowed the base of the fence in, such that it encroached into the applicant's property.