NEIGHBOUR’S TREE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23829, 8 June 1939, Page 17

NEIGHBOUR’S TREE

CLAIM FOR INJUNCTION RIGHT OF ACTION QUESTIONED 'Per United Press Association) AUCKLAND, June 7. A substantial bundle of bluegum kindling wood on the floor of the Supreme Court to-day suggested something unusual in the nature of the proceedings. The bundle was an exhibit produced in support of the claim of a Mount Albert resident for damages allegedly suffered through the dropping on his roof of sticks and nuts from a neighbour’s gum tree. The plaintiff was Francis Cornelius Malloy, a retired mill manager, of Mount Albert, and he brought his claim against William Gwennan Drummond, a school teacher, of Mount Albert. The plaintiff complained that from a large gum tree near the boundary, the dropping of leaves, bark, small branches and nuts on his roof caused loss of sleep and mental suffering and blocked the gutters and spouting of his house. He claimed £IOO damages and an injunction to compel the defendant to abate the nuisance.

The defendant replied that the tree was growing on the property at the time he purchased it in 1923, and that none of it overhung the plaintiff’s property. He denied that the plaintiff was entitled to relief.

Counsel said that the noise on the roof caused by the tree was having an injurious effect on the health of the plaintiff’s family and was detrimental to their use and enjoyment of their own dwelling.

Mr Justice Fair said he could understand that' this type of inconvenience was very annoying, but counsel had to satisfy him that the law prohibited the growing of a tree in this way. The defendant’s counsel said that if the plaintiff could satisfy his Honor that the law gave him the right of action his Honor need not trouble any further. His Honor: You contend that the plaintiff has no remedy in law?

Counsel: That is so. His Honor said he would take time to consider the question of law and would give his decision oh that before proceeding to hear evidence if that should be necessary.