Roebeck & anor v Nandi [2015] NSWLEC 1289

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Roebeck & anor v Nandi [2015] NSWLEC 1289 Hearing dates: 28 July 2015 Date of orders: 28 July 2015 Decision date: 28 July 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 2 Before: Galwey AC Decision: The application is upheld. See orders at paragraph 5. Catchwords: TREES (DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS); damage; fence; tree removal; consent orders. Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Clautina Roebeck (First Applicant) Eddie Roebeck (Second Applicant) Marlene Nandi (Respondent) Representation: Mr and Mrs Roebeck, litigants in person (Applicants) Mr Nandi, son and agent (Respondent) File Number(s): 20339 of 2015

Judgment

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

Background 1. Two Chinese Tallow trees grow between two dwellings in Enfield, adjacent to the common boundary. The trees are on the property owned by Mrs Nandi ('the respondent'). Her neighbours, the Roebecks ('the applicants'), have applied to the Court pursuant to s 7 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 ('the Trees Act') seeking orders for removal of the trees and repairs to the colourbond fence. Prior to the hearing the parties drafted consent orders, but before making the orders I must be satisfied that the Court's jurisdiction is enlivened and that the orders are appropriate.

Jurisdiction 1. The trees are in a narrow garden bed along the boundary. Tree T1 is the larger tree, but T2 is closer to the boundary. The trees are less than 10 metres tall. The colourbond fence is slightly displaced adjacent to T1 and more severely displaced alongside T2. The applicants' arborist suggests that T2 is most likely a sucker from the roots of T1. I accept this is likely. The fence displacement equates to damage. The proximity of the displacement to the trees' locations satisfies me that displacement is due to tree growth. Although perhaps minor at present next to T1, I accept that further damage is likely in the near future. Therefore the Court's jurisdiction is enlivened with regard to both trees.