Qui v Khoo

[2024] QCAT 265

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Qui & Anor v Khoo & Anor [2024] QCAT 265

PARTIES:

SHUANG QUI

(applicant)

YANG CHEE

(applicant)

v

SIEW HOON KHOO

(respondent)

CHUN CHOW KOH

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

NDR050-21

MATTER TYPE:

Other civil dispute matters

DELIVERED ON:

20 June 2024

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Cairns

DECISION OF:

Member Taylor

ORDERS:

1.     The applicant’s Application for a Tree Dispute filed 22 March 2021 is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – TREES, VEGETATION AND HABITAT PROTECTION – DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS – where a land owner complained about large tree branches hanging over the boundary from the adjoining land – where the complaining land owner wanted the branches cut back – where the complaining land owner commenced a proceeding in the Tribunal seeking orders for same - where the land on which the trees existed was sold before the proceeding was decided – where the new land owner removed the trees shortly after acquiring the land – where the removal of the trees resolved the issue the subject of the proceeding – where the complaining land owner pressed the action against the new land owner notwithstanding the removal of the trees – where the complaining land owner then alleged the trees caused damage to the common fence and to a retaining wall on the land – where the complaining land owner sought relief against the new land owner for the shared cost of replacing the common fence and for repairing the retaining wall

Neighbourhood Disputes (Dividing Fences and Trees) Act 2011 (Qld) – s 31, s 32, s 41, s 46, s 47, s 48, s 50, s 51, s 52, s 65, s 66, s 68

Belcher v Sullivan [2013] QCATA 304, cited

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:	This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)
Applicant:	Self-represented
Respondent:	Self-represented

REASONS FOR DECISION

Overview

1. The applicants complained that trees in an immediately neighbouring property were causing issues of concern regarding safety and unreasonable use and enjoyment of their land. It concerned, what I understood from the material, to be large branches on large trees. They applied to this Tribunal for an order that the owner of the neighbouring land trim the offending branches and pay the costs of same.

2. The neighbouring land owner did not respond in any way to the application made.

3. Approximately nine months after the proceeding was commenced, the neighbouring land owner sold the land. Promptly thereafter, apparently without knowledge of this proceeding, the new owners cut down the offending trees. That action resolved the issue the applicants complained of. However, the applicants pressed on, successfully having the new owners made respondents in the proceeding in substitution of the original respondents, and sought to expand their claim in the proceeding to incorporate what was said to be damage to the common fence between their land and the adjoining land, and damage to a retaining wall on…