Article: Law & Finance
How To Avoid A Tree Dilemma with Katrina Simpson
Trees are an important part of our daily life. They add aesthetic value to a community and are good for the environment. However they also may block light or view, create shadows, cause damage to drains or concreting or be an obstruction of some sort.
If you are a landowner, you generally have the right to the ordinary use and enjoyment of your land (subject to legislation or district plans). This means that generally you are able to grow trees, hedges, shrubs or bushes on your property as you please. However, your neighbours also have the right to enjoyment of their land, and you are not allowed to interfere with that right.
So what happens if a neighbour’s tree is interfering with your right to enjoyment of your land? Or if a tree is causing harm to your property? You have no right to take matters into your own hands and remove the tree yourself, so what can you do?
Obviously in most cases a pragmatic approach (approaching your neighbour to discuss your concerns) will achieve the best results. However if your relationship with your neighbour disintegrates it is helpful to know that the courts can assist you. The Property Law Act 2007 provides a remedy for disgruntled neighbours affected by trees on adjoining property.
A recent high court decision Yandle v Done examined this. In that case, the High Court confirmed that the Yandles had to trim a row of trees on their property which disrupted the sea views of the Dones. The Yandles had planted the trees so that they could obtain privacy from yet another neighbour. The court held that the trees constituted an “undue obstruction” and balanced the Yandles right to privacy against the Dones right to maintain their view (and the value of their property).
The Court also looked at the fact that the trees existed when the Dones acquired their property. There was an argument that the Dones should have known the trees would eventually interfere with their view, however this did not prevent the Court providing relief. Another matter to note is that the Court exercised its discretion in a conservative manner. The Court decided it was only justifiable to trim five of the nine trees. Doing this restored virtually full water views, but still maintained some privacy.
So, the lessons from this case? Firstly, be reasonable with your neighbour.
Involving the court is a costly exercise and one to be avoided. Reasonable neighbours should be able to come to an agreement between themselves, although sometimes that is not possible. At this stage it would be sensible for the parties to enter into mediation, saving costs, time and stress for both parties.
Katrina Simpson is a solicitor at Henderson Reeves Connell Rishworth Lawyers Limited. She can be contacted on 430 4350 or by email .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
