{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Choi v Buining
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Choi v Buining
[2016] NSWLEC 1024
Tags
No tags available
Case
Choi v Buining
[2016] NSWLEC 1024
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Amendment notes Medium Neutral Citation: Choi v Buining & anor [2016] NSWLEC 1024 Hearing dates:29 January 2016Date of orders: 29 January 2016 Decision date: 29 January 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 2Before: Fakes C Decision: See paragraph [29] Catchwords: TREES [NEIGHBOURS] Potential damage to property or injury; removal sought - pruning ordered Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Rural Fires Act 1997 Cases Cited: Freeman v Dillon [2012] NSWLEC 1057 Smith & Hannaford v Zhang & Zhou [2011] NSWLEC 29 Yang v Scerri [2007] NSWLEC 592 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Hee Soo Choi (Applicant) Robert and Lorna Buining (Respondents) Representation: Applicant: Mr J Lee (Solicitor) Respondents: Mr A Kaylinger (Barrister) Solicitors: Applicant: Joun Lawyers Respondents: Baldwin Oates & Tidbury File Number(s):20927 of 2015Judgment COMMISSIONER: The applicant resides in a very leafy area of Turramurra. The immediate locality is low density residential development characterised by relatively large blocks on which there are many mature and established trees. Many of the trees are likely to be remnants of the original tall forest which once covered the area. The applicant has applied under s 7 Part 2 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) for orders seeking the removal of two trees growing on the respondents’ property. Tree 1 is a Syncarpia glomulifera (Turpentine); Tree 2 is an Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum). The trees are located at the rear of the respondent’s battle-axe property adjacent to the respondent’s north-eastern boundary, which is the common boundary...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Choi v Buining
[2016] NSWLEC 1024
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Amendment notes Medium Neutral Citation: Choi v Buining & anor [2016] NSWLEC 1024 Hearing dates:29 January 2016Date of orders: 29 January 2016 Decision date: 29 January 2016 Jurisdiction:Class 2Before: Fakes C Decision: See paragraph [29] Catchwords: TREES [NEIGHBOURS] Potential damage to property or injury; removal sought - pruning ordered Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Rural Fires Act 1997 Cases Cited: Freeman v Dillon [2012] NSWLEC 1057 Smith & Hannaford v Zhang & Zhou [2011] NSWLEC 29 Yang v Scerri [2007] NSWLEC 592 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Hee Soo Choi (Applicant) Robert and Lorna Buining (Respondents) Representation: Applicant: Mr J Lee (Solicitor) Respondents: Mr A Kaylinger (Barrister) Solicitors: Applicant: Joun Lawyers Respondents: Baldwin Oates & Tidbury File Number(s):20927 of 2015Judgment COMMISSIONER: The applicant resides in a very leafy area of Turramurra. The immediate locality is low density residential development characterised by relatively large blocks on which there are many mature and established trees. Many of the trees are likely to be remnants of the original tall forest which once covered the area. The applicant has applied under s 7 Part 2 of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) for orders seeking the removal of two trees growing on the respondents’ property. Tree 1 is a Syncarpia glomulifera (Turpentine); Tree 2 is an Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum). The trees are located at the rear of the respondent’s battle-axe property adjacent to the respondent’s north-eastern boundary, which is the common boundary...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>