Cisneros v Cairns

[2020] NSWLEC 1597

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Cisneros v Cairns [2020] NSWLEC 1597

Hearing dates:

15 October 2020

Date of orders:

15 October 2020

Decision date:

15 October 2020

Jurisdiction:

Class 2

Before:

Douglas AC

Decision:

The orders of the Court are:

(1) The application is dismissed.

Catchwords:

TREES (DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS) – high hedges – is the obstruction of views severe

Legislation Cited:

Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006

Cases Cited:

Awad v Hardie (No 3) [2012] NSWLEC 1067

De Zylva v Staas [2012] NSWLEC 1242

Grantham Holdings Pty Ltd v Miller [2011] NSWLEC 1122

Haindl v Daisch [2011] NSWLEC 1145

Hinde v Anderson [2009] NSWLEC 1148

Johnson v Angus (2012) 190 LGERA 334; [2012] NSWLEC 192

McCallum v Riordan [2011] NSWLEC 1009

Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) 134 LGERA 23; [2004] NSWLEC 140

Tooth v McCombie [2011] NSWLEC 1004

Wisdom v Payn [2011] NSWLEC 1012

Texts Cited:

Macquarie Dictionary

Oxford Dictionary

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Lucille Cisneros (First Applicant)
Anthony Wrigley (Second Applicant)
Anthony Cairns (First Respondent)
Janine Cairns (Second Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel:
R Bear (Solicitor) (Applicants)
A Cairns (Litigant in person) (First Respondent)
J Cairns (Litigant in person) (Second Respondent)

Solicitors:
Coastal Law and conveyancing (Applicants)

File Number(s):

2019/345869

Publication restriction:

No

Judgment

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

1. COMMISSIONER: Ms Cisneros and Mr Wrigley submitted an application, pursuant to s 14B of Pt 2A of the Trees (Disputes between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act), claiming that a hedge in their adjacent neighbour’s property severely restricts views, and severely restricts sunlight to windows. The parties share a side boundary which runs from the south, where their houses face the street, to the north at the rear.

2. Mr and Mrs Cairns, the respondents, occupied their property in Safety Beach, on the mid-north coast, in April 2011. They submitted that their rear garden already contained seven trees and shrubs noted in the application, at this time. After constructing a 1.5 metre tall metal panel fence, also in 2011, they planted additional trees and shrubs along the boundary to provide a “soft screen” from the applicants’ property. Other trees and shrubs have also been planted in the interim.

3. Ms Cisneros and Mr Wrigley, the applicants, purchased their property in February 2014, and commenced their occupation in May 2015. They have carried out a series of Council approved renovations since owning the property, and further approved additions are yet to be undertaken. This development includes additions and extensions of decks on the northern, eastern, and southern sides of their residence, some of which were opposed by neighbours, including the respondents.

The onsite hearing

4. The hearing commenced with an inspection of the trees in the respondents’ rear yard. Prior conflict between the parties, including complaints by both to local police, had escalated to an extent that the applicants submitted that it would be neither “appropriate nor beneficial for either party to enter the other party’s property”.…