Zhang v Alzaidi

[2021] NSWLEC 1668

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Zhang v Alzaidi [2021] NSWLEC 1668
Hearing dates:	29 October 2021
Date of orders:	29 October 2021
Decision date:	29 October 2021
Jurisdiction:	Class 2
Before:	Galwey AC
Decision:	See [6] below.
Catchwords:	NOTICE OF MOTION – respondent in original proceedings seeks extension of time for completing orders
Cases Cited:	Zhang v Alzaidi; Zounis v Alzaidi [2021] NSWLEC 1536
Category:	Procedural rulings
Parties:	Lusha Zhang (First Respondent on the Motion) David Lisica (Second Respondent on the Motion) Samir Alzaidi (Applicant on the Motion)
Representation:	L Zhang (Litigant in person) (Respondents on the Motion) S Alzaidi (Litigant in person) (Applicant on the Motion)
File Number(s):	2021/45399
Publication restriction:	No

Judgment

This decision was given as an extemporaneous decision. It has been revised and edited prior to publication.

1. Orders were made on 17 September 2021 in Zhang v Alzaidi; Zounis v Alzaidi [2021] NSWLEC 1536 for the removal of one tree and pruning several trees within 30 days of the date of the orders.

2. Mr Alzaidi filed a Notice of Motion on 15 October 2021 seeking an extension of time to carry out the orders in proceedings 2021/45399 Zhang v Alzaidi. He did not file a Notice of Motion in proceedings 2021/88694 Zounis v Alzaidi because, in his words, he did not want to pay two filing fees. As a result, I cannot consider any extension of time here for the 2021/88694 proceedings.

3. Mr Alzaidi says he has development consent for his property, including the removal of all trees within the property. He sees no need to carry out the pruning works when the trees will be removed some months later.

4. Mr Alzaidi’s request to have until early in 2022 to carry out the orders is refused for the following reasons:

• Mr Alzaidi submitted to the Court during the original onsite hearing (23 June 2021) that the possible development of his property with a boarding house was not relevant to these proceedings and should not be considered by the Court.

• Even if Mr Alzaidi has development consent and certification, the Court has no assurance, nor do the applicants in proceedings 2021/45399, that works will commence in early 2022 as Mr Alzaidi suggests.

• If Mr Alzaidi has development consent for removing all trees on his property, then he has the option of removing them now rather than pruning them, so the supposedly redundant pruning could be avoided anyway.

• Mr Alzaidi has not applied for an extension of time in proceedings 2021/88694. He should have carried out those works already and is still required to carry out those works. Therefore, he needs to have arborists come to the property to carry out tree works, regardless of my findings here.

5. For the final two reasons above, I do not see that Mr Alzaidi suffers any significant disadvantage as a result of my decision here.

Orders

6. The timeframe in the original orders has lapsed, so Mr Alzaidi’s application via Notice of Motion for further time is granted to the following extent, allowing him a further three weeks from today:

1. Order (2) in proceedings 2021/45399 Zhang v Alzaidi is amended as follows: “(2) By 19 November 2021 the respondent is to engage and pay for a suitably qualified and experienced arborist (minimum AQF Level 3) with all appropriate insurances to carry out the following works …”.

2. If the trees subject to the orders in proceedings 2021/45399 Zhang v Alzaidi are removed (with any required council consent) prior to 19 November 2021, the orders in those proceedings lapse.

…………………………

D Galwey

Acting Commissioner of the Court

**********

Decision last updated: 01 November 2021