Turramurra: tree dispute lands in court for Dominique Grubisa, Kevin Grubisa and David Lally

A 20m tall tree growing in the back yard of a prominent wealth development guru’s Sydney home was at the centre of neighbourly dispute that ended up in the Land and Environment Court.

Safety risks and property damage were among the issues of contention in a neighbourly dispute over a 20m tall tree growing in the backyard of a home on Sydney’s leafy upper north shore.

Prominent wealth development guru Dominique Grubisa and her husband Kevin have been ordered to poison and remove a sweetgum tree growing in their southwest corner of their North Turramurra property after a complaint from their neighbour David Lally escalated into court action.

Mr Lally’s concerns centred on “extensive damage” to his paved driveway and a retaining wall caused by the tree’s roots extending onto his property.

Dominique Grubisa and her husband have been ordered to poison and remove the tree.

His application also related to the tree’s foliage and branches overhanging a shared driveway used to access his home which he claimed posed a risk of injury

Ms Lally applied to the Land and Environment Court requesting an order for the tree to be cut down after earlier attempts for the Grubisa’s to remove the tree – made via a text message request – proved futile.

In an application to the court, Mr Lally said he sought an independent quote to replace the damaged driveway and retaining which was estimated to cost $75,000 and was unable to have the work insured unless the tree was cut down.

A generic photo of a sweetgum tree.

Safety was another area of concern, with Mr Lally claiming Mhow a “large bough fell from the tree in good weather” onto his property in November 2020 and blocked the driveway.

Lawyers for the Grubisa’s argued there were various factors that could be contributing to the wall and paving damage including the single skin brick construction of the wall, the questionable strength and adequacy of its foundations, and the absence of strengthening pillars.

Land and Environment Court acting commissioner John Douglas decided to hold an on-site hearing to inspect the tree himself after determining that initial court hearings were unable to shed any light on the extent and location of the tree’s roots, resulting in “opinions largely based on speculation”.

A generic photo of a sweetgum tree.

Visiting the site, he found the tree appeared to be “vigorous and structurally stable”, boasting a trunk diameter of 850mm and a canopy spread of 17-19 metres which partially hung over Mr Lally’s property.

Commissioner Douglas also discovered sections of the wall were “bowed and cracked” and roots were clearly visible near it.

He found the damage to the wall as a result of sweetgum’s root network “was evident” – but also noted there were other factors likely to have also contributed to damage including roots from a separate liquidambar tree.

In his findings, he said he was of the “opinion that the wall would have remained largely intact and functional in the absence of pressure from the (sweetgum’s) roots”

An aerial photo of North Turramurra. Photo: Realestate.com.au

“The tree is a major cause of the wall and paving damage which has occurred in the past and is currently occurring,” he said.

“Though (sweetgums) are normally structurally stable in the ground, the extensive root pruning required to mitigate the current damage, and provide room to perhaps avoid future damage, is sufficiently extensive to make in-ground stability a genuine concern.

“The financial costs involved to accommodate the engineering and construction of a ‘beefed up’ wall, required in an attempt to avoid future damage, would be considerable and an unreasonable impost for Mr Lally to cover.”

Mr Douglas ordered the tree to be poisoned and removed at the Grubisa’s expense by October 31 this year.

The order also requires the tree’s stump to be ground down to a depth of at least 300mm. All tree work must be completed by a qualified arborist.

The case is the latest tree dispute to end up in the court with 27 separate cases heard in the Land and Environment Court since January this year.

Suburbs at the centre of the cases have included Mosman, Fairlight, Ryde and Kiama with trees obstructing harbour views often the primary issue of contention.