Fallon v Croese

The matter of Fallon v Croese involved a dispute between the applicants, Fallon, and the respondents, Croese, regarding the erection of a fence on the common boundary between their adjoining properties. The application was heard in the Magistrates' Court of Victoria. The applicants sought an order for the respondents to construct a new fence along the boundary line, while the respondents contested the necessity and specific terms of the proposed fence.

The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether the applicants were entitled to an order compelling the respondents to construct a fence on the common boundary. Secondary issues included the specification of the fence, the cost contribution by the applicants, the method of selecting and instructing the contractor, and the enforcement mechanism for compliance with the court's orders.

The court found that the applicants were justified in seeking a fence to resolve their ongoing dispute with the respondents. The court determined that the fence should be 1.8 metres high, made of woodland grey Colorbond sheet metal, and erected along the common boundary line as surveyed by Parker Scanlon. The respondents were to choose the fencing contractor, who must be qualified and licensed, and were to bear the full cost of the fencing work. The applicants were to contribute $1,225.00 towards the cost of the fence. The court mandated that the respondents provide details of the proposed contractor and the scope of works to the applicants at least seven days before the commencement of the work. The respondents were to give instructions to the contractor, and the applicants were to pay their contribution on the completion of the work. The court allowed either party to apply to renew the proceedings if the orders were not complied with by 30 May 2017.