NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Drolz v Sinclair [2008] NSWLEC 34
APPLICANT Louise Drolz PARTIES : RESPONDENTS Sheree & Andrew Sinclair
FILE NUMBER(S) : 21080 of 2007
CORAM: Moore C - Fakes AC
Jurisdiction - Trees (Neighbours) - Neighbour Application :- KEY ISSUES: Boundary tree Is tree "principally" situated on adjoining property
LEGISLATION CITED: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 s 4(3)
CASES CITED: Brown & anor v Weaver [2007] NSWLEC 738
DATES OF HEARING: 24 January 2008
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 24 January 2008
APPLICANT In person LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENTS Mr Sinclair, agent
JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES
MOORE C FAKES AC
24 January 2008
07/20180 Louise Drolz v Sheree & Andrew Sinclair
This decision was given as an extemporaneous decision. It has been revised and edited prior to publication.
JUDGMENT 1 COMMISSIONERS: This is an application pursuant to s 7 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Trees Act) made by Ms Drolz concerning a conifer (species unknown) and a Banksia (likely Banksia integrifolia) which have both been removed to ground level prior to the hearing. The trees were located on the boundary between Ms Drolz' property and the property to the west owned by Mr and Ms Sinclair.
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