Vecchio v Papavasiliou

[2015] QCAT 70

CITATION: Vecchio v Papavasiliou [2015] QCAT 70

PARTIES:	Salvatore Vecchio (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Nicholas Papavasiliou Robyn Papavasiliou (Respondents)

APPLICATION NUMBER: NDR211-13

MATTER TYPE: Other civil dispute matters

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Senior Member Stilgoe OAM

DELIVERED ON: 3 March 2015

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.    The registered owner of the lot at 16 Hillside Crescent HAMILTON  QLD  4007 (“the Tree-Keeper”) arrange to have the following works carried out on the tree/s the subject of the dispute (“the Initial Works”):

a.    The Tree-Keepers are to prune and limit the height of the tree hedge between 16 Hillside Crescent HAMILTON and 10 Hillside Crescent HAMILTON (“the Neighbour”) so that it is maintained at a height of 4.55 metres from natural ground level for the section forward from the control joint in the Tree-Keeper’s driveway (shown on Figure 1) to the front alignment of the two properties.

2.    The Tree-Keepers shall carry out periodic and ongoing hedging as per the Initial Works as required, and not less than at 6-monthly intervals (“the Subsequent Works”).

3.    The Initial Works and the Subsequent Works must be carried out:

a.    By an appropriately insured arborist with a minimum of Australian Qualifications Framework level 3 in Arboriculture; and

b.    In accordance with Australian Standard 4373-2007 “Pruning of Amenity Trees”;

c.    The Initial Works must be carried out within 60 days of the date of this order.

CATCHWORDS:

NEIGHBOURHOOD DISPUTE RESOLUTION – TREES – loss of a view – where applicant purchased vacant block – where pre-existing hedge – where hedge replaced – where applicant built new home – where hedge blocked view from new home – where hedge blocked sunlight – whether a right to maintain view – whether right to sunlight

Neighbourhood Dispute Resolution (Dividing Fences and Trees) Act 2011 (Qld) s 66(3)(b)

Laing & Anor v Kokkinos & Anor (No 2)[2013] QCATA 247
Thomsen v White [2012] QCAT 381
Calvisi v Brisbane City Council (2008) 1 PDQR 374

APPEARANCES:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. For twenty-five years, Mr and Mrs Papavasiliou have lived in their heritage listed home on a large block in Hillside Crescent Hamilton. In 2008, Mr Vecchio bought the small, vacant block of land next door. In 2010, he built a modern home on that block.

2. Both houses face south. Across the street, to the south, a large apartment block restricts the views from both houses but they have view corridors to the Brisbane River looking both east and west.

3. There is a tall hedge of lilly-pilly between Mr and Mrs Papavasiliou and Mr Vecchio. The hedge restricts Mr Vecchio’s view to the east. He wants the hedge removed, or pruned to a height of less than 2.5 metres from the natural ground level. He says the hedge restricts a pre-existing view and restricts sunlight to his home. He says the leaf…