ANAGNOSTOU and ANOR v VINICIO and ANOR [1997] NSWCA 22
NSW Caselaw
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
ANAGNOSTOU and ANOR vy VINICIO and ANOR
SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
MEAGHER, COLE and BEAZLEY JJA
30 October 1997, 30 October 1997
[1997] NSWCA 22
Encroachment of Buildings Act 1922 — no question of principle
Cole JA The facts surrounding the appellants' claim under the Encroachment
of Buildings Act 1922 are set out in the judgment of Pearlman J delivered 26 June
1995.
Her Honour found:
1. Two encroachments were trifling and the third was insignificant. No
encroachment was greater than 250mm.
2. The reason the proceedings were brought was due to an antagonism
between the parties.
3. There was no satisfactory evidence concerning the value of the land
upon which the encroachments stood, or loss or damage which would be
occasioned to the applicants arising from the encroachments.
Each of these findings was plainly correct.
Her Honour concluded that it was "proper in the circumstances of the case"
within s3(3) of the Act to dismiss the application. That finding was also plainly
correct.
Again no error of law has been demonstrated. The appeal should be dismissed
with costs.
Meagher JA I agree.
Beazley JA I agree.
MEAGHER JA: The order of the Court is, therefore, that the appeal is
dismissed with costs.
Counsel for the appellant: R Skiller
Solicitors for the appellant: Star Carver & Co
Counsel for the respondent: M Confos/MCarey
Solicitors for the respondent: El Khouri & Sakr
Related laws
No related documents linked yet.
You've got 21 of 22 free Acts left this visit. Sign up anytime for Facts, Related, and study briefs too.