Land and Environment Court
of New South Wales
CITATION: Rootes v Parmeter [2007] NSWLEC 444 PARTIES: APPLICANT
RESPONDENT
Hazel Rootes
Mathew ParmeterFILE NUMBER(S): 20224 of 2007 CORAM: Moore C KEY ISSUES: Trees (Neighbours) - Neighbour Application :-
CompensationCASES CITED: Barker v Kyriakides [2007] NSWLEC 292 DATES OF HEARING: 16 July 2007 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 16 July 2007 LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: APPLICANT
RESPONDENT
Mr K Rootes, agent
In person
JUDGMENT:
THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALESMOORE C
07/20224 Hazel Rootes v Mathew Parmeter16 July 2007
This decision was given as an extemporaneous decision. It has been revised and edited prior to publication.JUDGMENT
1 COMMISSIONER: I determine that the compensation claim by the applicant by deciding that the sum of $165 for the account for sewer line clearing rendered by and paid to Frank Bleechmore Plumbing is to be reimbursed by the respondent; that sixty per cent of the account rendered by and paid to Peter Kinsela Plumbing for work done to replace a section of the sewer pipe be paid for the respondent (the apportionment arising as a consequence of the fact that the sewer pipes were accepted to be terracotta and constructed some thirty or so years ago – it being appropriate on the age, method of construction and the likely useful life of those pipes that there should be a sixty per cent apportionment in favour of the applicant and a forty per cent apportionment in favour of the respondent); and that the quotation for leaf cleaning and the like from the house gutters and downpipes is disallowed on the basis I am satisfied that I should apply the Tree Dispute Principle set out in Barker v Kyriakides [2007] NSWLEC 292. As a consequence of the foregoing, there will be an order that the respondent is to pay the applicant the sum of $546.48 within thirty days of the date of the orders of the Court.
Commissioner of the Court
- AGLC
- Rootes v Parmeter [2007] NSWLEC 444
- Case
- [2007] NSWLEC 444
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court was required to decide included the extent of compensation for the sewer line clearing and the replacement of the sewer pipe, as well as the applicability of the Tree Dispute Principle to the quotation for cleaning the gutters and downpipes. The court needed to determine the appropriate apportionment of costs for the sewer pipe replacement due to its age and construction, as well as whether the quotation for leaf cleaning and gutter maintenance should be allowed.
The court determined that the compensation claim by the applicant should be partially allowed. The court ruled that the sum of $165 for the sewer line clearing rendered by and paid to Frank Bleechmore Plumbing should be reimbursed by the respondent. For the replacement of the sewer pipe, the court apportioned sixty per cent of the account rendered by and paid to Peter Kinsela Plumbing to the respondent, and forty per cent to the applicant, considering the age and construction of the pipes. The quotation for leaf cleaning and the like from the house gutters and downpipes was disallowed, applying the Tree Dispute Principle set out in Barker v Kyriakides. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $546.48 within thirty days of the date of the Court's orders.
The court's decision was rendered as an extemporaneous judgment on 16 July 2007, and the parties were represented by Mr K Rootes for the applicant and the respondent appeared in person. The case was cited as Rootes v Parmeter [2007] NSWLEC 444, with the file number 20224 of 2007.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.