Fardouly v Zeritis Issa v Zeritis

In the Supreme Court of Queensland, Fardouly v Zeritis Issa v Zeritis was heard. The plaintiffs, Mr and Mrs Issa, sought orders against the defendant, Mr Zeritis, in relation to the removal of trees planted along the western boundary of his property, which they claimed was affecting the light and amenity of their property. The dispute arose from an existing agreement between the parties, which included a provision for the removal of certain trees in the event of a sale of Mr Zeritis’ property. The Issas claimed that the trees were causing a significant reduction in light and amenity and were seeking an order for their removal.

The legal issues before the court included whether the trees affected the light and amenity of the Issas’ property to the extent claimed, and whether Mr Zeritis was required to remove the trees under the terms of the existing agreement. The court also had to determine the appropriate process for Mr Zeritis to follow in engaging an arborist to carry out the removal of the trees.

The court found that the trees did indeed affect the light and amenity of the Issas’ property to a significant degree and that Mr Zeritis was required to remove them under the terms of the existing agreement. The court held that Mr Zeritis was to obtain three quotes from suitably qualified arborists for the removal of the trees and that he was to engage and pay for the arborist selected by the Issas to carry out the removal of the trees within 60 days of the date of the orders. The court also ordered that the Issas were to pay 25% of the quoted amount within 14 days of receipt of a copy of the paid invoice for the works. The court further ordered that if trees were again planted along the western boundary of Mr Zeritis’ property, they were to be maintained at a height not exceeding 3.5 metres. The exhibits were retained by the court.