News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Injunction forces new vote on Laman St figs 

Injunction forces new vote on Laman St figs

18 Nov, 2011 03:00 AM
AFTER two years of council brawling, three months of stalling, and ratepayers $1.5million out of pocket, the Laman Street debate is back to square one.

The NSW Land and Environment Court has ordered that the street’s fig trees not be removed until at least December, ensuring that Newcastle councillors will vote for a 13th time on the long-running dispute.

In a 30-page written judgment, Justice Peter Biscoe said his decision to grant an injunction would have the effect of allowing the council to lawfully consider Premier Barry O’Farrell’s offer of an arborist to assess the trees.

The council had been unable to rescind or alter its decision to remove the trees before November 25 because of a provision in the NSW Local Government Act.

Justice Biscoe said there were ‘‘considerable difficulties’’ in the case brought to the court by Save Our Figs.

‘‘The argument ... is not strong and is bedevilled by difficulties,’’ he said. ‘‘However, on balance, I am prepared to accept that it just rises to the status of a serious question to be tried.

‘‘After weighing the various considerations, I conclude that the balance of convenience marginally favours the grant of an ... injunction.’’

The council initially voted to fell the trees on July 19, but despite at least four false starts only a few branches were cut.

Work has been stalled by a rescission motion, a mediation, an ‘‘unlawful’’ motion for an independent assessment, ugly clashes at community protests that prompted increased security, and the court case.

The decision is a massive win for Save Our Figs, and the group said yesterday it would continue to push for an independent risk assessment when the council next meets.

‘‘I’m relieved,’’ spokeswoman Fee Mozeley said yesterday. ‘‘The council and the community can now come together ... and find a way forward.’’

Cr Bob Cook said he would be willing to support an evaluation of whether the council’s initial decision was reasonable, but not another risk assessment.

An adjourned council meeting to discuss the issue will resume on November 29.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Whilst the Court has ordered the fig trees be retained until December, 2011, it must be asked and answered, if the Council's Insurers shall extend indemnity of the present location of the trees, until the Court Order has been observed. It would appear that the preservation and present positioning of the trees, shall extend, for some time, beyond the 1st December, 2011. Shall the Insurer extend indemnity, for an indeterminate period, after the 1st December, 2011. To quote, with apology, 'therein lies the rub'.
Posted by Robert - Hunter Valley, 18/11/2011 3:59:24 AM, on The Herald
here we go again , round & round, when will it ever end. I think SOF loves wasting our rates,thi mob should be held accountable and foot he bill
Posted by Novocastrian, 18/11/2011 4:46:23 AM, on The Herald
Great News: good sense and judgement prevails. Soon the council might follow suit and stop throwing good money after bad. Go Newcastle!
Posted by Steviewonderwhy, 18/11/2011 4:48:07 AM, on The Herald
Read it on http://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/action/PJUDG?jgmtid=155623


Posted by felicity, 18/11/2011 4:54:06 AM, on The Herald
Pathetic!
Posted by joker, 18/11/2011 4:58:39 AM, on The Herald
The only way to come together and find a way forward is for the silent majority (who are too busy living their lives to chain themselves to dying trees) to find some way to express their disgust at the protesters and to allow the council to get on with governing. UGH!!! The stupidity of this is unbelievable.
Posted by notafan, 18/11/2011 5:07:09 AM, on The Herald
Unless the disciplines that define the parameters and guidelines that arborists are trained to create their opinions become involved -I don't think we can expect arborist's to change their views. The specific circumstances of these and many fig trees need specialist in-depth analysis by experts whose roles define the rules. Australian standards for all things are constantly under review .( in some instances sometimes still not right.) But if the reality is to be known then the best of engineering and science must be advising the arborists. As that is what they depend on for guidance.
Posted by Master Sgnt Bilko, 18/11/2011 5:37:08 AM, on The Herald
This is like the Global Warming stupidity all over again.
Posted by GeorgeJ, 18/11/2011 5:38:03 AM, on The Herald
Four months after the death knell & the trees remain standing with the commonsense of Biscoe J.

Congratulations Fee Mozley & Save Our Figs ... and of course the plethora of Novocastrians who stood up to be counted.

Perhaps the Herald will publish the judgment in full given the previous thorough coverage by Ben Smee et al.

Now we need long memories when voting for Crs at the 2012 NCC elections.


Posted by Machiavelli, 18/11/2011 5:38:45 AM, on The Herald
Good to see fee is relieved, but who pays? Find a way forward. I think there is only one decision SOF will accept at our cost
Posted by john newy, 18/11/2011 5:49:30 AM, on The Herald
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
11 November, 2011
15 November, 2011
04 November, 2011
10 November, 2011
16 November, 2011
17 November, 2011
15 November, 2011
16 November, 2011
MULTIMEDIA
01 November, 2011
09 November, 2011
02 November, 2011

Most popular articles


 
 
 


Newcastle Herald







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...