Cameron v Smith [2023] NSWCATCD 25

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Cameron v Smith [2023] NSWCATCD 25 Hearing dates: 6 February 2023 Date of orders: 27 February 2023 Decision date: 27 February 2023 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: W Priestley, General Member Decision: (1) The time within which the application may be lodged is extended under section 41 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act to 5 December 2022. (2) The application is dismissed. Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act, section 41 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Regulation, section 23(3)(b) Dividing Fences Act, sections 4, 11, 12 Cases Cited: Draper v Gibbs [2014] NSWCATAP 54 (23 September 2014) Jackson v NSW Land and Housing Corporation [2015] NSWCATAP 281 (22 December 2015) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Rhonda Cameron – applicant Wayne Smith – respondent Representation: The parties represented themselves File Number(s): COM 22/53776 Publication restriction: NIL

REASONS FOR DECISION

The application 1. The application seeks orders that 52 metres of 1.8 metre colourbond fencing be constructed on the boundary with the respondent's adjoining land, and that the respondent pay half of the cost of $8,354. The respondent contends the existing dividing fence is "sufficient", and therefore he is not liable (under section 6 of the Dividing Fences Act ('Act")), to contribute anything for a different fence, as the construction of one should not be ordered.

Evidence 1. Both parties relied on affidavits addressing the factors in section 4 of the Act and annexing various documents such as maps, photos, and quotes. The respondent also relied on a report from a fencing contractor, Neville Batastuzzi. Additional evidence was provided by answers the parties and Mr Bastuzzi gave to questions from the Tribunal at hearing. The Tribunal refused the applicant's request to be permitted to rely on additional documents lodged shortly before the hearing, except for pages 13 and 14 of "RC 12" which touch on Local Government fencing requirements. Those additional disallowed documents related to disputes with some of the applicant's other neighbours and are not relevant. Both parties were given the opportunity to make additional oral submissions at hearing about the section 4 considerations.