{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
The Owners Corporation SP 1932 v The Owners Corporation SP 1027
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
The Owners Corporation SP 1932 v The Owners Corporation SP 1027
[2015] NSWLEC 1354
Tags
No tags available
Case
The Owners Corporation SP 1932 v The Owners Corporation SP 1027
[2015] NSWLEC 1354
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: The Owners Corporation SP 1932 v The Owners Corporation SP 1027 [2015] NSWLEC 1354 Hearing dates:26 August 2015Date of orders: 26 August 2015 Decision date: 26 August 2015 Jurisdiction:Class 2Before: Fakes C Decision: Application dismissed Catchwords: TREES [NEIGHBOURS] Damage to property, retaining wall; location and ownership of wall. Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Cases Cited: Hinde v Anderson & anor [2009] NSWLEC 1148 McCallum v Riodan & anor [2011] NSWLEC 1009 Shagrin v O’Neil [2010] NSWLEC 1368 Smith & Hannaford v Zhang & Zhou [2011] NSWLEC 29 Wazrin Pty Ltd v Pearson [2010] NSWLEC 1020 Zangari v Miller (No 2) [2010] NSWLEC 1093 Category:Principal judgmentParties: The Owners Corporation SP 1932 (Applicant) The Owners Corporation SP 1027 (Respondent) Representation: Applicant: Mr P Dunbar-Hall (Agent) Respondent: Did not attend File Number(s):20241 of 2015Judgment COMMISSIONER: The applicant has applied under s 7 Part 2 of the Trees(Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) for orders seeking the replacement of a retaining wall between the parties’ Neutral Bay properties and the removal of a White Cedar tree (Melia azedarach) growing on the respondent’s property. Before discussing the substance of the matter it must be noted that the hearing commenced on site at the appointed time and location specified in the Court’s supplementary directions forwarded to the parties by a listings officer on 15 July 2015. There was no attendance from the respondent property owners or their agent. The matter has been...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
The Owners Corporation SP 1932 v The Owners Corporation SP 1027
[2015] NSWLEC 1354
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: The Owners Corporation SP 1932 v The Owners Corporation SP 1027 [2015] NSWLEC 1354 Hearing dates:26 August 2015Date of orders: 26 August 2015 Decision date: 26 August 2015 Jurisdiction:Class 2Before: Fakes C Decision: Application dismissed Catchwords: TREES [NEIGHBOURS] Damage to property, retaining wall; location and ownership of wall. Legislation Cited: Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Cases Cited: Hinde v Anderson & anor [2009] NSWLEC 1148 McCallum v Riodan & anor [2011] NSWLEC 1009 Shagrin v O’Neil [2010] NSWLEC 1368 Smith & Hannaford v Zhang & Zhou [2011] NSWLEC 29 Wazrin Pty Ltd v Pearson [2010] NSWLEC 1020 Zangari v Miller (No 2) [2010] NSWLEC 1093 Category:Principal judgmentParties: The Owners Corporation SP 1932 (Applicant) The Owners Corporation SP 1027 (Respondent) Representation: Applicant: Mr P Dunbar-Hall (Agent) Respondent: Did not attend File Number(s):20241 of 2015Judgment COMMISSIONER: The applicant has applied under s 7 Part 2 of the Trees(Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (the Act) for orders seeking the replacement of a retaining wall between the parties’ Neutral Bay properties and the removal of a White Cedar tree (Melia azedarach) growing on the respondent’s property. Before discussing the substance of the matter it must be noted that the hearing commenced on site at the appointed time and location specified in the Court’s supplementary directions forwarded to the parties by a listings officer on 15 July 2015. There was no attendance from the respondent property owners or their agent. The matter has been...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>