NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Buckingham v Ryder [2007] NSWLEC 458 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
APPLICANT Janette Buckingham PARTIES : RESPONDENT Katherine Ryder
FILE NUMBER(S) : 20536 of 2007
CORAM: Moore C
KEY ISSUES: Trees (Neighbours) - Neighbour Application :- A vine is not a "tree" for the purposes of the Act
Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Electricity Supply Act 1995 Forestry Act 1916 LEGISLATION CITED: Rural Lands Protection Act 1998 Electricity Supply (General) Regulation 2001 Rural Fires Act 1997 Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000
CASES CITED: Environment Protection Authority v Hardt (2006) 148 LGERA 61, [2006] NSWLEC 438
DATES OF HEARING: 16, 19 and 25 July
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 25 July 2007
APPLICANT In person LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT In person
JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES
MOORE C
25 July 2007
07/20536 Janette Buckingham v Katherine Ryder
JUDGMENT
This decision was given as an extemporaneous decision. It has been revised and edited prior to publication.
1 COMMISSIONER: This is an application pursuant to s 7 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act). It is made by Ms Buckingham, a resident of 27 Rosedale Street, Dulwich Hill, concerning a number of plants located at the rear of a dwelling located at 66 Windsor Road, Dulwich Hill. That property is owned and occupied by Ms Ryder.
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