Environment Court judge Brian Dwyer said on Friday that Peter and Sylvia Aitchison had established their case by an overwhelming margin.

Aitchison, along with the Wellington City Council, had asked the court to at least reduce the height of a child's play fort built by David Walmsley which blocked the Wellington harbour view from their Maida Vale Rd property in the suburb of Roseneath.

During the past week, the Aitchisons presented evidence from experts about the effects of the fence that they said had knocked $NZ900,000 ($839,000) off the value of their $NZ1.6 million ($1.49 million) property.

The judge and Environmental Commissioner Ian Buchanan heard the unusual rarely-used application under the Resource Management Act and visited the site.

The judge said on Friday the effect was objectionable and he agreed with a former Wellington town planner that it was highly offensive.

He said the construction was a contrivance to get around rules that prevented the building of a fence.

"The current structure is just a means to the same end."

The judge had strong words for Walmsley, saying he was wrong in thinking that because he was allowed to build the structure that he did not have to have any regard for his neighbours.

"There was a deliberate refusal to consider any remedy of the effects. He said in so many words, that he was not obliged to have regard and did not do so."

After the court's ruling on Friday, Peter Aitchison said the structure had now been up so long - almost a year - that he could hardly remember what the view was like.

He said the couple were pleased with the decision and that "justice had been done".

"We've avoided our house, it's been so unpleasant living with that wall, we've spent a lot of time out of town."

Aitchison would not say how much the case had cost but it was well into six figures, which was "totally unnecessary".

The suggestion in court during the case, given by Walmsley's side, that the couple could simply put up curtains, was "facetious", he said.

"Who would want people standing on the ramp up there, looking in? Every time they got on the walkway we'd have to pull our curtains."

He said the couple were "absolutely exhausted" by the case and the stress had affected their health.

The former Commonwealth Games rower, from 1958, had an extra reason to want the view of the harbour back.

"We came to Wellington to retire and have a quiet life, enjoy our grandchildren. We've got two grandchildren that are rowers. I liked to look down at the harbour, when they were training."

A former Wellington town planner had told the court he had been shocked when he saw the fence and had never seen such a severe effect on a property before.

A academic psychologist had been asked about the social effect of the structure and told the court putting it up was about dominance and control.

Walmsley opposed the application.

The structure was permitted under the district plan and he said he wanted privacy for his property, which sits below the Aitchisons.

The Aitchisons now have a month to file an enforcement order that the court will sign requiring Walmsley to remove the structure.

The court has previously ruled the Wellington City Council made a mistake in its interpretation of the district plan when giving the playground the green light.

The council has appealed that decision, with a hearing set for next month, which means any further decision on the fence may be put on hold until that is heard.

The judge said even with other permitted structures able to be built there, it was hard to see how they could be as bad as the fence was now.

Buchanan, who delivered part of the decision, said the fence was dominant and overbearing and that the walkway affected the Aitchisons' privacy.

Buchanan said the view had made a significant contribution to the residential amenity and there was an almost complete loss of the primary view.

He said any residual view - out over Petone and only seen while standing at the eastern end of the Aitchisons' patio, did not make up for it.

How did it come to this?

• After the fence was erected last year, the Aitchisons asked the council if it could be taken down.
• The council insisted its hands were tied, and that the fence was allowed under the District Plan.
• The Aitchisons took the matter to the Environment Court, which ruled the council had made a mistake in interpreting the plan when they gave the playground the go-ahead. However, it did not rule the fence should be dismantled.
• The council accepted the ruling, and said the fence would have to come down.
• It is still there, and the Aitchisons have returned to the Environment Court to apply for an order to reduce its height. This time they are being supported by the council.
• An order can be made by the court requiring something be done about the structure, including removing it or lowering it.
• Meanwhile, Wellington City Council has launched an appeal in the High Court against the Environment Court's original decision.

Stuff