NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Zhou v Hobbs [2011] NSWLEC 1275 Hearing dates: 14 September 2011 Decision date: 20 September 2011 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: Galwey AC Decision: 1.The application for compensation is dismissed. 2.The application regarding the tree is upheld. 3.The respondent is to engage and pay for an arborist, with a minimum AQF level 3 and appropriate public liability insurance, including for damage to underground services, to remove the fallen stem and all its branches and foliage and to remove the remainder of the tree including all three remaining stems and their crowns to no more than 200mm above ground level. The stumps are to be poisoned immediately they are cut. 4.This work is to be done in accordance with the WorkCover NSW Code of Practice for the Amenity Tree Industry. 5.The respondent is to give the applicant seven days notice of the works. 6.The applicant is to provide access to his property for the works to be carried out during reasonable hours. 7.The works in (3) are to be completed within 30 days of the date of these orders. Catchwords: TREES [NEIGHBOURS]; damage to property; removal ordered; compensation refused. Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Cases Cited: Robson v Leischke [2008] NSWLEC 152; 72 NSWLR 98; 159 LGERA 280 Category: Principal judgment Parties: APPLICANT C Zhou
RESPONDENT M Hobbs File Number(s): 20437of 2011
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