Goodwin v Haddad & anor [2014] NSWLEC 1145

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Goodwin v Haddad & anor [2014] NSWLEC 1145 Hearing dates: 21 July 2014 Decision date: 21 July 2014 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: Galwey AC Decision: The application is upheld in part: see orders at paragraph (17) Catchwords: TREES (DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS); hedge; obstruction of sunlight; orders for pruning Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Category: Principal judgment Parties: APPLICANT Norma Goodwin

RESPONDENTS Buthina AlRabadi and William Haddad Representation: APPLICANT Patricia Cook (Agent)

RESPONDENTS Buthina AlRabadi and William Haddad (Litigants in person) File Number(s): 20106 of 2014

Judgment

This decision was given as an extemporaneous decision. It has been revised and edited prior to publication.

The application 1A childcare centre sits among residential dwellings in Old Guildford, in Sydney's western suburbs. Screening vegetation growing within the childcare centre, around most of its boundaries, was apparently a requirement of the Development Application approval for the centre. 2Ms Goodwin (the applicant) lives in the dwelling to the south of the childcare centre. She has applied to the Court pursuant to Part 2A of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) seeking orders for that section of the screening vegetation that is along the common boundary near her dwelling to be pruned to prevent an obstruction of sunlight to her windows. She wants the trees pruned to reduce their height to around 60 cm above the top of the 1.8 metre tall boundary fence, and to remove overhanging branches. She also seeks costs for making the application but, as Commissioners of the Court do not have the jurisdiction to award costs, that would require a Notice of Motion to be heard by a Judge or the Registrar, should she wish to pursue that element of her application. 3The owners of the childcare centre, Ms AlRabadi and Mr Haddad (the respondents) say they have the trees pruned regularly to maintain them at 3.5 metres height and that they were pruned recently, including overhanging branches. 4Before making any orders the court must be satisfied of some key jurisdictional tests: firstly, that the trees are planted so as to form a hedge and that they are at least 2.5 metres tall; and, secondly, that they cause a severe obstruction of sunlight to windows of the applicant's dwelling. If these tests are satisfied then I must consider a range of discretionary matters before making orders as I see fit to remedy, restrain or prevent the obstruction.