Armati v The Owners – Strata Plan No 15695

[2026] NSWLEC 1136

NSW Land and Environment Court

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. TREES (DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS) — Pt 2 application — neighbouring tree — whether the tree has caused damage — whether the tree is likely to cause damage or injury — whether compensation should be paid — causal connection — contributing factors

Quick Take

The Court ordered removal of a structurally deficient willow myrtle at the tree owner's cost, finding the tree's weak co-dominant stem union was likely to cause damage or injury in the near future under s 10(2) of the Trees Act. The applicants failed to establish a causal nexus between the tree and retaining wall damage due to insufficient evidence, applying Smith & Hannaford v Zhang & Zhou [2011] NSWLEC 29. The Court rejected the respondent's argument that development works on the applicants' land destabilised the tree, finding that the structural defect at the tree's base was the real source of risk and that AS 4970:2025 does not treat major notional root zone encroachment as a trigger for removal but rather for further investigation. Fence remediation costs were split equally between the parties on the basis that neither party's acts or omissions solely caused the damage.