NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Karam v Meredith [2012] NSWLEC 1114 Hearing dates: 3 February 2012 Decision date: 21 March 2012 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: Fakes C Decision: Application upheld in part. Severe obstruction of a view found; one tree to be removed and replaced by the respondent Catchwords: TREES [NEIGHBOURS] hedge; obstruction of views and sunlight; Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Cases Cited: Tooth v McCombie [2011] NSWLEC 1004 Granthum Holdings Pty Ltd v Miller [2011] NSWLEC 1122 Tenacity Consulting v Warringah [2004] NSWLEC 140 Ball v Bahramali & Anor [2010] NSWLEC 1334 Haindl v Daisch [2011] NSWLEC 1145 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ms M Karam (Applicant) Mr T Meredith (Respondent) Representation: Applicant: Mr N Luke (Solicitor) Respondent: Ms H Irish (Barrister) Applicant: Stacks Respondent: McCartney Young File Number(s): 21003 of 2011
Judgment 1COMMISSIONER: This is an application pursuant to s 14B Part 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) made by the owner of a property in East Ballina against the owner of trees growing on adjoining land. 2The applicant contends that a row of Golden Cane Palms (Dypsis lutescens), Bird of Paradise (Strelitzia nicolai), and some Bangalow palms (Archontophoenix cunninghamiana) planted on the respondent's property near the common boundary fence, severely obstruct views from her dwelling and sunlight to windows of her dwelling. 3The applicant seeks orders for the removal of the trees, or in the alternative, the pruning of the trees to a height sufficient to prevent obstruction of views. No orders are specified for remedying the alleged obstruction of sunlight.
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