Sharma v Conservator of Flora and Fauna

Sharma was the applicant who sought to have a decision reviewed by the Conservator of Flora and Fauna. The Conservator had refused to grant approval for the removal of a regulated tree from the applicant’s property. The dispute was heard and determined by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The AAT was required to determine whether the Conservator’s decision to refuse approval to remove the tree was lawful and appropriate. This involved considering the criteria outlined in the legislation for approving tree damaging activity. Specifically, the AAT had to assess whether the tree represented an acceptable risk to public or private safety, whether it was causing or threatening to cause substantial damage to a building, structure or service, whether its location was inappropriate given its potential size and growth, whether it was affecting solar access to the lease or neighbouring lease during winter hours, and whether there were exceptional circumstances or the tree had significant importance in its surrounding location.

The AAT considered each criterion and found that none were met. The tree did not represent an unacceptable risk to public or private safety, nor was it causing or likely to cause substantial damage. Its location was deemed appropriate, it did not affect solar access during the relevant winter hours, and there were no exceptional circumstances or significant importance attributed to the tree in its location. The AAT found that the Conservator’s decision was well-reasoned and supported by the evidence. The AAT confirmed the Conservator’s decision, upholding the refusal to grant approval for the removal of the regulated tree.

The final orders of the Tribunal were that the Conservator’s decision be confirmed, and no further action be taken to remove the regulated tree. The applicant’s application for administrative review was dismissed.