Nevins & anor v Yeomans & anor [2011] NSWLEC 1037

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Nevins & anor v Yeomans & anor [2011] NSWLEC 1037 Hearing dates: 15 February 2011 Decision date: 15 February 2011 Before: Fakes C Decision: 1. Application to prune hedge upheld in part. Catchwords: TREES [NEIGHBOURS]; hedge; severe obstruction of a view; pruning ordered; Act does not apply to obstruction of sunlight to a garden. Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mr J Nevins (Applicant) Mrs E Nevins (Applicant) Mr A Yeomans (Respondent) Mrs S Yeomans (Respondent) Representation: Mr J Nevins [litigant in person] (Applicant) Mrs E Nevins [litigant in person] (Applicant) Did not attend hearing (Respondent) File Number(s): 20867 of 2010

Judgment This decision was given as an extemporaneous decision. It has been revised and edited prior to publication. 1COMMISSIONER: This is an application pursuant to s 14B Part 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) made by the owners of a property in Banora Point against the owners of trees growing on an adjoining property. 2The applicants are seeking the pruning of 12 trees to fence height and their ongoing maintenance at that height. 3These orders are sought because the applicants contend that the trees block sunlight to their garden and severely obstruct their view of Banora Golf Course and more distant views to Coolangatta and the coast. 4The applicants represented themselves at the hearing, however the respondents did not attend and nor did they did not nominate an agent to appear on their behalf. I note from the Court file that the respondents did not participate in the directions hearing on 20 December 2010. At that hearing, the Assistant Registrar gave the applicants leave to serve the directions by post and leave for substituted service of documents to the first respondent's father-in-law who resides on the property. 5I am satisfied that these directions have been followed and that the hearing can proceed in the absence of the respondents.