Owners of Vancouver waterfront mansion sue neighbours over alleged hedge removal

The owners of a waterfront mansion on Vancouver’s Point Grey Road have launched a lawsuit against their neighbours, claiming part of a mature cedar hedge that provided privacy around their home was cut down without consent. The claim alleges the hedge was a major selling point when the property was purchased and says the loss has affected both privacy and enjoyment of the home.

According to the notice of civil claim described in reporting on the case, Israel and Elaine Shafran say their neighbours, Irene Kam Sheung Lo and Albert Jinghan Cheng, hired a company to remove part of the hedge on June 15, 2025, as part of work on the neighbouring property. The Shafrans allege about 11 feet of the privacy hedge was removed and that workers trespassed in the process.

Lawsuit centres on privacy and property value

The claim says the cedar hedge, made up of mature trees roughly 12 feet tall, created privacy, security and natural screening around the property. The plaintiffs argue that those features were a significant reason they chose the home over other nearby properties.

They also argue the hedge cannot be reasonably restored to its previous height, maturity or appearance with replacement trees, and say the loss has exposed their property to neighbouring views. As a result, the lawsuit seeks damages related to loss of privacy, loss of amenity and reduced property value.

Claims not yet tested in court

None of the allegations have been proven in court, and the neighbours had not yet filed a response at the time of the reporting. The claim also alleges the hedge removal improved the neighbouring property’s view and value.

Legal observers say disputes over trees and hedges between neighbours are not unusual, particularly where privacy and property enjoyment are central issues. In cases like this, key questions often include whether the plants were entirely on one property, whether any permission was given, and whether any title-related rights allowed trimming. That portion is general legal context rather than a finding in this case.

For now, the case remains at the civil claim stage, with the court still to hear the defendants’ side and determine whether any damages are owed.