KEY POINTS:
Colin and Maree Garstang's Wairarapa house is, practically, their castle, given that it has a three-storey tower attached to it.
But that Tuscan-style architectural feature, added so the family could enjoy a commanding view of south Wairarapa, also gives them views into the backyard of the neighbouring property
of Steven and Karen Courteney and their daughter's bedroom.
The two families have been feuding for 12 years over the tower. The dispute has become bitter, as the increasingly hostile correspondence between the neighbours shows, and last week the battle made it all the way to the Masterton District Court.
The legal bills have been huge - the Courteneys claim to have stopped counting after the fees reached six figures while the Garstangs have enlisted the help of high-profile Wellington QC Hugh Rennie.
The cost on personal relationships has been bigger. The two families barely acknowledged each other during the hearing, other than to occasionally exclaim with astonishment at the other's evidence.
It is hard to imagine cordial words being exchanged over the fence in the future, no matter what the verdict.
While the case centred on an attempt by the Garstangs for a court order to fell a stand of gum trees planted by the Courteneys, the root cause of the problem is the Garstangs' house.
Built in 1995, it sits on a 20m elevation uphill from the Courteneys and is about 160m away at its closest point. The Courteneys maintain the house was built some distance from where they expected it to be, and they feel its location and design means their lives are lived "under a microscope".
They made their feelings known to the Garstangs soon after the house was completed, pointing out how intrusive the view from the tower and the second-storey studio of Mrs Garstang, a fibre artist, were.
However, an agreement that something needs to be done to block the Garstangs' view of the Courteneys is the only common ground between the neighbours.
The families have since argued about what sorts of trees should be planted to screen out the view and where they should be planted.
Something which to the outsider seemingly could have been sorted out by a meeting between the two parties has instead become a morass of claims and counter-claims.
The gum trees at the centre of last week's case were planted by the Courteneys, 1.5m from the boundary between the properties. At that time, they also proposed the families establish a joint management zone between their properties but the Garstangs found the terms unreasonable.
In the intervening years, the trees grew, to the point where they now obscure the view from Mrs Garstang's studio and block the natural light.
After what the Garstangs said had been numerous attempts to initiate mediation, they took court action, seeking an order under Section 129 C of the Property Act to remove the trees as they are an undue obstruction.
That legislation was written with urban areas in mind and the outcome of the case could be significant for the increasing number of people on rural lifestyle properties.
Mr Garstang, a solicitor, told the court he accepted the tower intruded on the Courteneys' privacy and that he had been prepared to work with them to find a mutually acceptable solution but to no avail.
"We brought the application reluctantly and hoped [the court case] could have been avoided."
He said the gum trees were a "severe and dramatic" obstruction to their view and could pose a possible danger to the house if they toppled over in high winds.
Mr Courteney, a petroleum geologist, told the court all his family's tree planting had been to ensure their privacy. They had been prepared to try to preserve views from the Garstangs' guest bedrooms but never agreed to anything that would have compromised their privacy.
He said the initial loss of their privacy had greatly upset the family. Having regained a measure of it thanks to the gum trees, the bid by the Garstangs to have them felled had caused "further upset and dismay".
Meanwhile, the trees keep growing. Soon, the foliage will be higher than the windows in Mrs Garstang's studio, meaning that room will regain a view through the tree trunks down the valley and into the Courteney property - leaving neither side happy.
Whether those trees stand or fall now rests in the hands of Judge Michael Radford, who has reserved his decision on the fate of the trees.
