The applicant sought an order permitting removal of a boundary tree damaged in the 2013 ice storm after arborists reported it was unsafe and a branch had already damaged a neighbouring property.
The respondent opposed removal and relied on a statutory consent requirement under the Forestry Act.
The court held that s. 10(3) of the Forestry Act did not apply as between co-owners of a boundary tree and that the dispute was governed by the common law of nuisance.
Because the tree presented a patent and continuing danger, the respondent was obliged to abate the nuisance and was ordered not to interfere with removal and to pay half the removal costs.
