Craig Stokeld and Kim Janelle Stokeld v Stephen Simpson and Charmaine Simpson [2014] NSWCATCD 213

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Craig Stokeld and Kim Janelle Stokeld v Stephen Simpson and Charmaine Simpson [2014] NSWCATCD 213 Hearing dates: 24 October 2014 Decision date: 26 November 2014 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: A McMurran, General Member Decision: The application is dismissed. Catchwords: Sufficient dividing fence Legislation Cited: Dividing Fences Act 1991 ("the Act") Cases Cited: Larney v Johannsson [2012] NSW SC 1297; Larney v Johannsson [2013] NSW CA 409; Draper v Gibbs [2014] NSWCATAP 54 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Craig Stokeld (first applicant) Kim Janelle Stokeld (second applicant) Stephen Simpson (first respondent) Charmaine Simpson (second respondent) Representation: Craig Stokeld for the applicants Stephen Simpson and Charmaine Simpson appeared in person File Number(s): COM 14/36486 Publication restriction: Unrestricted

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background 1. In these proceedings the applicants seek orders firstly for the removal of an existing dividing fence along part of the boundary between the adjoining properties, or in the alternative, that the existing dividing fence adjoining the properties at number 9 and number 11 Tudibaring Parade, Macmasters Beach be lowered. 2. The parties have been involved in related proceedings COM 14/44547 where the respondents in these proceedings, Mr and Mrs Simpson, had sought orders pursuant to a notice served in accordance with the Act, for contribution in respect of a dividing fence between their property at 9 Tudibaring Parade, Macmasters Beach and the property of the applicants, Mr and Mrs Stokeld. Those proceedings were dealt with by an agreement reached between the parties in the Tribunal and dated 9 October 2014. A copy of that agreement has been placed with the papers in this file. 3. For ease of reference, proceedings COM 14/44547 will be referred to as the "Settled Proceedings". 4. Following the agreement reached in the Settled Proceedings, orders have been made as sought and entered in these proceedings in partial resolution of this fencing dispute. 5. The balance of the dispute between the parties which continues in these proceedings was determined at a hearing at Gosford on 24 October 2014. The hearing considered two issues raised by the applicants, concerning the existing fence erected on part of the adjoining boundary.