Event and Time
Event Description
In this case, Catherine L’Estrange and Louise-Anne Louw (the applicants) sought orders to prune a row of lilly pilly trees (the trees) on the neighbouring property owned by Allison and Jason Cunial (the respondents). The primary issue was the trees' obstruction of the applicants' view towards the ocean from their dwelling, invoking the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006. A hearing was conducted on-site to assess the situation.
Application and Claims
- The applicants claimed that the trees severely obstructed their view, which they had enjoyed upon purchasing their property in February 2021.
- The respondents contested that the trees did not severely obstruct the applicants' view and intended to maintain them at their current height.
- The applicants contended their ongoing negotiations for a satisfactory agreement regarding the trees had been ignored.
Judicial Decisions
The Court determined that the pruning of the lilly pilly hedge was justified due to its severe obstruction of the applicants’ view. The Court ordered: 1. Biannual pruning of the trees to a maximum height of 3.8 meters. 2. The respondents must provide one week's notice before each pruning. 3. The applicants are required to allow reasonable access for pruning activities.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Applicants' Claims:
- The trees obstructed their ocean view severely. - They had made reasonable efforts to resolve the matter amicably over approximately two years. - They provided photographic evidence to illustrate the obstructed view over time.
- Respondents' Claims:
- They argued that the trees did not constitute a severe obstruction of the view. - They were committed to maintaining the trees at their current height and had pruned them recently.