NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Quinn v Stevens [2021] NSWLEC 1361 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 11 June 2021 Date of orders: 2 July 2021 Decision date: 02 July 2021 Jurisdiction: Class 3 Before: Dixon SC Decision: The Court orders that: (1) As soon as practicable, the applicant is to arrange for and pay all costs incurred up to the amount of $7,000 in relation to the preparation of a Request, the accompanying plan of the site of the easement and attend to all matters and things necessary to register the vertical extension of the cross-easement for support of the common party wall (the Easement) the subject of the proceedings with Land Registry Services NSW (LRS). The respondent is to be furnished with such documents for their prior approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The costs shall include the cost of obtaining any necessary consent of the respondent's registered mortgagee to the Easement. (2) Each party will do all acts and things as are reasonably necessary to achieve registration of the Easement including but not limited to providing the necessary consents in any PEXA workspace which is required to effect registration, agreeing to the Registrar General amending the Easement as required by the Registrar General and/or the production of the relevant certificates of title at LRS and consenting to the execution of the Request by David Patrick Baxter, as solicitor authorised by the parties. (3) The applicant is to pay the respondent $13,000.00 within 14 days of receipt from LRS of a Registration Notice in respect of the Easement. (4) All claims in the proceedings are otherwise dismissed with each party to pay their own costs. Catchwords: ENCROACHMENT OF BUILDINGS – vertical extension of cross-easement for support of the common party wall – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders Legislation Cited: Conveyancing Act 1919, s 88B Encroachment of Buildings Act 1922, ss 2, 3 Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 16, 19, 33, 34 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Danielle Simone Quinn (Applicant) James Walter Monckton Stevens (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: D Baxter (Solicitor) (Applicant) A Whealy (Solicitor) (Respondent)
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