Area(s) of Law :
Source : EWCA Civ 1353
Damage to Property; Tree Preservation Order; Nuisance, Town and Country Planning Act 1990
The Local Authority appealed against the decision of the judge that when determining whether to cut down, uproot, top or lop a tree subject to a Tree Preservation Order (“TPO”) for the prevention or abatement of a nuisance, it was irrelevant for the purposes of s.198(6)(b) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 that there were other possible works that could abate or prevent the same nuisance. The tree at issue was a large oak tree that had caused damage to Mr. Perrin’s land and he had sought a declaration that he was entitled to fell the tree because it was ‘necessary for the prevention or abatement of a nuisance’.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The underlying purpose of the legislation was to preserve trees that were the subject of a TPO and it would be counterintuitive if, when considering the minimum necessary to prevent or abate a nuisance caused by such a tree, steps that might be taken other than to the tree itself had to be ignored. Such a restrictive approach was not required either expressly or impliedly by the legislation.
This content is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by any member of Chambers or by Chambers as a whole.
Please note that we do not give legal advice on individual cases which may relate to this content other than by way of formal instruction of a member of Hardwicke. However if you have any other queries about this content please contact: