Lardner v Bishop [2011] NSWLEC 1149

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Lardner v Bishop [2011] NSWLEC 1149 Hearing dates: 4 May 2011 Decision date: 20 May 2011 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: Hewett AC Decision: Orders to prune a tree Claims for compensation dismissed Catchwords: TREES [NEIGHBOURS] - damage to property; injury to persons Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mr D Lardner (Applicant)

Mr I Bishop (Respondent) Ms N Sundgvist (Respondent) Representation: Mr D Lardner (Applicant in person)

Mr I Bishop (Respondent in person) Ms N Sundgvist (Respondent in person) File Number(s): 20061 of 2011

Judgment 1COMMISSIONER: This is an application pursuant to Part 2 s 7 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) made by the owner of a property in Narara against the owners of a tree growing on an adjoining property. 2The applicant alleges that the tree has caused damage to his property and that it presents a risk of injury to persons using his swimming pool and rear garden. He seeks orders for the removal of dead wood, the trimming back of overhanging branches and a reduction in the height the tree growing on the adjoining property to the northeast. He also seeks orders for the payment of compensation for the repair of his pool, the replacement of a garden shed and the replacement of his rear boundary fence. Finally, he seeks compensation for expenses incurred in the lodgement of his Court application. 3I informed both parties at the commencement of the hearing that Commissioners are not authorised to make orders as to costs and therefore that element of the applicants claim for compensation is dismissed. 4The applicant's property damage claim contains three elements. The first concerns a tear in the plastic liner in his aboveground swimming pool. He alleges that a dead branch fell from the respondents' tree into the swimming pool and subsequently tore the plastic liner at the base of the pool. 5The second element concerns a steel garden shed situated adjacent to the pool decking and close to the rear boundary of the property. The applicant alleges that falling dead branches from the respondents' tree have damaged the shed roof causing it to leak and causing indentations in the roof surface. 6The third element concerns the shared rear boundary fence that the applicant alleges was damaged by falling dead wood from the respondents' tree in 2007. He also alleges that roots from the respondents' tree are further undermining the fence.