NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Mazurkiewicz v Mohamed [2024] NSWLEC 1274 Hearing dates: 20 May 2024 Date of orders: 20 May 2024 Decision date: 20 May 2024 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: Galwey AC Decision: The Court orders: (1) The Pt 2A application is refused. (2) The Pt 2 application is granted to the extent of the following orders. (3) Within 30 days of the date of these orders, the respondents, or a suitably qualified contractor engaged and paid for by the respondents, are to remove Tree 5, being the southernmost tree in the hedge in their front garden along their western boundary. (4) The exhibits are retained. Catchwords: TREES (DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS) – Pt 2 application – neighbouring trees – damage to property – whether the respondents could have prevented the damage – orders for one tree to be removed – Pt 2A application – neighbouring hedges – obstruction of sunlight and views – whether the obstruction is severe – Pt 2A application refused Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006, Pt 2, ss 7, 10, 12, Pt 2A, ss 14B, 14E Cases Cited: Barker v Kyriakides [2007] NSWLEC 292 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Stanislaw Mazurkiewicz (Applicant) Tamer Mohamed (First Respondent) Vicki Flower (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: P Moore (Agent) (Applicant) T Mohamed (Self-represented) (First Respondent) V Flower (Self-represented) (Second Respondent) File Number(s): 2024/83225 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