Tighe v Schak

In the case of Tighe v Schak, the applicant, Mr. Tighe, sought a Tree Order under the Trees Act to remove or alter mature gum trees growing on his riverside property. The respondent, Ms. Schak, alleged that the trees caused an unreasonable interference due to the debris they shed, which affected her property, including her light-coloured pool tiles. The case was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The central legal issues revolved around whether the trees constituted an unreasonable interference, considering their pre-existing condition and their contribution to biodiversity and the local ecosystem. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the trees posed an unacceptable risk to health or safety.

The Tribunal found that the trees were present before Ms. Schak bought her property, and there was no evidence that they posed an unacceptable risk to health or safety. The Tribunal also considered that the trees contributed positively to the local ecosystem and biodiversity. The Tribunal emphasised the lack of evidence showing that the trees were a direct cause of damage to Ms. Schak’s pool tiles, noting that the tiles were light-coloured and not covered, potentially exacerbating the issue. Furthermore, any action to remove or alter the trees would require consent from the Brisbane City Council, which had not been sought or granted. Given these factors, the Tribunal concluded that the interference caused by the trees was not unreasonable and dismissed the application for a Tree Order.