Chunara v Meshram (No.2)

Chunara v Meshram (No.2) involved the respondent, Mr. Meshram, applying to renew proceedings related to a dispute over the construction of a dividing fence. The initial proceedings were dismissed by the Local Court, which held that Mr. Meshram's construction of a fence on the boundary line between his property and his neighbour's, Mr. Chunara, was non-compliant with the Dividing Fences Act 1991. The respondent sought to renew the proceedings to argue that the fence complied with the Act and to challenge the Local Court's findings. The court was required to decide whether the respondent's application to renew should be granted and if the fence complied with the statutory requirements.

The court found that the respondent had not demonstrated any new matter that could warrant the renewal of proceedings. The court was also required to determine whether the fence complied with the Act. It held that the evidence showed that the fence was built on the boundary line, which was not compliant with the Act. The court noted that the statutory requirement is for a fence to be erected within the boundary line of the party constructing it, and the evidence showed that the fence was built on the line itself. The court also found that the respondent had not applied for an extension of time to remedy the non-compliance, and therefore the fence remained non-compliant.

The court dismissed the respondent's application to renew the proceedings. The court held that the respondent had not shown any new matter that warranted the renewal of the proceedings and that the fence remained non-compliant with the statutory requirements. The court found that the evidence showed that the fence was built on the boundary line, which was not compliant with the Act, and that the respondent had not applied for an extension of time to remedy the non-compliance. The court also held that the Local Court's findings were correct and that there was no basis to renew the proceedings.