Huang v Finch

Huang and Finch, neighbours, were in dispute over the dividing fence between their properties. The applicant, Huang, sought orders for the replacement of the existing dividing fence, while the respondent, Finch, contested the need for replacement and the proposed construction methods. The case was heard and determined by the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to decide whether the existing dividing fence met the requirements of the Dividing Fences Act 1994 (NSW), whether the time for initiating proceedings should be extended, and whether the proposed replacement fence was appropriate. The Tribunal also had to consider the impact of removing vegetation, including trees, to construct the replacement fence.

The Tribunal found that the existing dividing fence did not meet the requirements of the Act, as it was not sufficiently secure or tall. It was also determined that the proposed replacement fence, a slate grey Colorbond fence 1.8m in height, was appropriate. The Tribunal did not extend the time for initiating proceedings and determined that any trees on the common boundary could not be removed without appropriate consent from local government authorities. The Tribunal ordered Huang to demolish and remove the existing wire mesh fence and construct the replacement fence according to the specified requirements.

The Tribunal further ordered that Huang must notify Finch of the proposed fencing work three clear business days before it was to occur. Finch and any person occupying the property were to give reasonable access to the licensed persons performing the work. The costs of the fencing work were to be shared between the parties, with Finch to pay Huang $3,903.50 within 28 days of the completion of the work. If either party sought a costs order, they were required to notify the Tribunal and the other party in writing within 14 days of the decision.