Heated neighhbour dispute drags into court after fight breaks out over bamboo in affluent Sydney suburb

By PAUL SHAPIRO, SENIOR NEWS REPORTER, AUSTRALIA Published: 07:20, 2 July 2026 | Updated: 07:26, 2 July 2026 A heated neighbourhood dispute over bamboo in an affluent suburb has come to an end after the matter was dragged into court.  Zhe Zheng and Xiaoping Wan sued Michael Carew and Debra Anne Carew over their refusal to remove bamboo at the Beecroft property, in northern Sydney. The dispute landed in the New South Wales Land and Environment Court in December last year, with the shaky relationship deteriorating since 2020. The court heard the Carews wanted their neighbours on Albert Road to remove three large 80-year-old blue gum trees from their property, but their neighbours refused.  The Carews complained and 'repeatedly' asked their neighbours to prune or remove the blue gums due to the maintenance burden from leaves, bark, and dead branches that shed from the trees.  The Carews also took photos of damage to cars and roof tiles by the larger dead blue gum branches and an injury to Ms Carew's head.  However, the neighbours attempted to remove the trees but were blocked by Hornsby Shire Council because they were a protected species and 'healthy and sound'. Mr Zheng and Ms Wan also refused to prune the blue gum branches which overhung the 'common boundaries'.  Zhe Zheng and Xiaoping Wan sued Michael Carew and Debra Anne Carew over their refusal to remove bamboo at the Beecroft property, in northern Sydney Mr Zheng claimed the trees were regularly inspected by expert arborists and deadwood was pruned as required. By June 23, Mr Zheng and Ms Wan obtained a fencing order requiring the Carews to contribute more than $3,000 for a 1.8metre Colorbond fence which now runs along the east side boundary next to the neighbour's driveway.  In September 2023, the Carews planted a long row of Slender Weavers Bamboo along the common boundary and 'very close' to the new fence.  However, on September 22, 2023, Mr Zheng sent a notice of demand to the respondents titled: 'Immediate Action Required for Bamboo and Tree Plantings'.  Mr Zheng raised three concerns: potential fence damage, encroachment by bamboo, and obstruction of morning sunlight to east facing dwelling windows. The Carews refused, citing they 'particularly valued the privacy the rapidly establishing bamboo provided' because Mr Zheng had a 'network of security cameras around his dwelling [the Carews] found intrusive and disconcerting'. The court heard the cameras were installed prior to the Carews moving in but at least one camera pointed down their driveway. The Carews claimed the bamboo was 'non-invasive and unlikely to encroach or cause damage on the [Mr Zheng and Ms Wan's] land because it was a 'clumping rather than running variety'. The neighbours put in the bamboo because they were worried about lack of privacy due to CCTV cameras By 2025, the bamboo had grown 'tall and dense' and was allegedly damaging the fence and encroaching under the fence onto Mr Zheng and Ms Wan's land, according to court documents.  The bamboo was also 'severely obstructing sunlight' to Mr Zheng and Ms Wan's windows. Mr Carew emailed a response to Mr Zheng's complaints where he compared the bamboo issue to 'our experience over the last six years with our property'. 'The never ending and constant issues with your trees,' Mr Carew said in an email. Mr Carew also cited the 'nuisance allegedly caused by the applicants' cameras' while claiming the 'ongoing issue with your trees is beyond reasonable'. The tribunal heard Mr Carew said he 'formally refused to 'accede to your request about the bamboo' and the matter landed in court. The court made an onsite inspection where Mr Zheng showed them various cameras attached to his home in an 'attempt to show that they were directed appropriately for his family's security' and not towards the Carews' property. Mr Zheng and Ms Wan alleged the bamboo had damaged and displaced the boundary fence. 'The hedge had been planted immediately adjacent to the Colorbond fence, leaving little to no separation,' Mr Zheng noted. The couple also claimed gutter and roof damage was 'likely in the near future' and they 'anticipated ongoing maintenance challenges and potential subsurface damage due to increased encroachment by bamboo roots'. The Carews responded  'clumping bamboo' was unlikely to cause damage and claimed their neighbours had 'not provided any evidence to substantiate the risk of damage to the boundary fence or encroachment and loss of amenity'.  The Carews also said the bamboo was 'prized for its privacy' as it partially screened their neighbours' cameras. They also 'loved the bamboo's aesthetic contribution'.  The Carews also submitted the 'perceived injustice' of Mr Zheng demanding the bamboo's removal while 'he doesn't believe he has to prune his trees that overhang our property' because the 'council tell him the tree is healthy'.  In response, Mr Zheng said the blue gum trees are 'entirely unrelated to this tree application'. The court ruled in favour of Mr Zheng and Ms Wan after it handed down its decision on June 26. 'I was satisfied that the bamboo was causing misalignment of the boundary fence which constituted fence damage,' acting-Commissioner John Douglas said.  'The primary cause appeared to be the respondents' restraint of the bamboo, apparently to direct it away from their driveway, which caused the fence to lean towards the bamboo.' The Carews were ordered to remove the bamboo within 45 days of the order and pay for any work which may be required to repair the fence if it is found to be damaged. The Daily Mail attempted to contact the Carews and Mr Zheng for comment.  No comments have so far been submitted. Why not be the first to send us your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards. By posting your comment you agree to our house rules. Do you want to automatically post your MailOnline comments to your Facebook Timeline? Your comment will be posted to MailOnline as usual. Do you want to automatically post your MailOnline comments to your Facebook Timeline? Your comment will be posted to MailOnline as usual We will automatically post your comment and a link to the news story to your Facebook timeline at the same time it is posted on MailOnline. To do this we will link your MailOnline account with your Facebook account. We’ll ask you to confirm this for your first post to Facebook. You can choose on each post whether you would like it to be posted to Facebook. Your details from Facebook will be used to provide you with tailored content, marketing and ads in line with our Privacy Policy.