Big oak. Responsibility.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

That’s going to depend on how you handled the matter.

 

You have a common law right to abate the nuisance, the tree has no right to trespass so that’s simple cut the branch off. You also have a duty of care to others so we need to look at the merits of these conflicting common law rights.

 

If a tree can’t survive without using resources to which it is not entitled, clearly its survival is in question.

 

I think the right to abate trumps the duty of care but the situation needs handling with care. If you intend to do the kind of severe pruning it would be prudent to inform the owner of the tree to allow them to get an expert opinion on the condition of the tree.

 

Such a caveat would insulate you from any future litigation.

 

Andy

 

caveats like that wont hold, and waht onsultant worth his salt is going to reccomend such a practice?

[combined tree services]

That’s going to depend on how you handled the matter.

 

You have a common law right to abate the nuisance, the tree has no right to trespass so that’s simple cut the branch off. You also have a duty of care to others so we need to look at the merits of these conflicting common law rights.

 

If a tree can’t survive without using resources to which it is not entitled, clearly its survival is in question.

 

I think the right to abate trumps the duty of care but the situation needs handling with care. If you intend to do the kind of severe pruning it would be prudent to inform the owner of the tree to allow them to get an expert opinion on the condition of the tree.

 

Such a caveat would insulate you from any future litigation.

 

Andy

 

 

Never the less , willfuly cutting a tree back to such extent it causes the demise of the tree resulting in the death and or failure of the tree would still be classed as criminal dammage .

 

i have had to deal with such action for clients and reccomended legal action should be taken . on overhanging branch does not constitute trespass in any way shape or form , it has not entered your propperty it is simply using airspace over your property to which you do not have any ownership of as far as i am aware .

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

on overhanging branch does not constitute trespass in any way shape or form , it has not entered your propperty it is simply using airspace over your property to which you do not have any ownership of as far as i am aware .

 

actualy, i believe this is not correct, i was under the assumption, and stand to be corrected that you do in fact hold rights to the vertical limits, such as would stop a building being placed on the boundary and only having say a gutter overhanging the adjoining space, the gutter would impinge on the said "airspace" etc maybe a poor sampling.

[skyhuck]

actualy, i believe this is not correct, i was under the assumption, and stand to be corrected that you do in fact hold rights to the vertical limits, such as would stop a building being placed on the boundary and only having say a gutter overhanging the adjoining space, the gutter would impinge on the said "airspace" etc maybe a poor sampling.

 

Correct.

 

Other wise you could buy a building plot only one meter wide and then build a huge house that only touched the ground on your plot, but overhung all the surrounding land.

[combined tree services]

im not aware of a vertical limmit in relation to trees , yes withing the town and county planning rules there are when it comes to construction but i may be wrong