JUDGE SPARES TREE

Greymouth Evening Star, 19 June 1939, Page 5

JUDGE SPARES TREE

) NO RIGHT OF REMOVAL. [per press association.'] AUCKLAND. June 18. An action between neighbours, which Mr. Justice Fair described as raising a, question of general interest, and of considerable importance, was decided by his Honor in a. written judgment issued in the Supreme Court. The action concerned a. large gum tret! growing near a boundary and the right, of the adjoining owner to have it removed on the grounds that it was causing a nuisance to him through frequent dropping of leaves and sticks on to his roof. His Honor decided that the plaintiff had no right of action. The proceedings were brought by Francis Cornelius Molloy against William Gwennap Drummond. The plaintiff claimed that, the dropping of leaves, small branches and nuts on his roof caused loss of sleep and mental suffering and blocked the spouting and gutters of his house. F,cr this he asked £lOO damages and an injunction to compel defendant to abate the nuisance. “If the defendant were to be aeld liable in this case,” said his _ Honor, “then neighbours who were disturbed by falling acorns from Oak trees might well make a similar claim and the right to have such trees growing on boundaries, which has from the settlement. of the Dominion up to the present. been assumed to exist, would disappear.” It appeared that the tree was naturally upon the land, and there was no obligation upon the owner to prevent damage arising from the effect of natural agencies operating upon his land in its ordinary or natural state. Closing his Honor said: “It appears, therefore, that the use of the land by the defendant cannot be held to be excessive or unreasonable and, therefore, the plaintiff has not a right of action. It is unfortunate that he should, upon this view, be obliged to suffer the annoyance which he does, but that appears to be the result oi a risrht which the law confers on his neighbours to use his land in tWordinarv and natural way and which the Court cannot deny him. Upon this ruling, the defendant is entitled to judgment.” <