Jump to content

daltontrees

Member
  • Content count

    3,264
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About daltontrees

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    56degN 4degW
  1. Snakebark maple?

    Yes, looks like a straight A. davidii.
  2. Tree id, a spruce variety?

    Erm.. no. Cones are upward, ruling out Spruce, and very much ruling in Fir. Needles are too flat to roll between the fingers, ruling out Spruce. Flush, round needle scars, ruling out Spruce (peg attachment). That light bark is not like Spruce either. All in all, with bracts visible, and all other diagnostic features, I'd say it was a planted-out Nordmann (Fir) christmas tree. Could have got a few bob for the crown if you'd held off for a few weeks.
  3. Tricky TPO situation

    The law doesn't begin and end with the High Court and s.284., and with England. I am certain that the superior courts would take a case that had sufficient prima facie prejudice and ultra vires. The cases you cite pre-date the latest court rules, but that's stil not the point. It would not be in society's iterest to allow a situation to arise where someone has surrered loss beccause a staturory body has wilfully or negligently failed to exercise its powers correctly. The law never stands still. Denning was famous for being unhappy about the inadequacies of law, and often codified law in written judgements. He virtually wrote the law of CPO compensation single handedly, and in my former life as a surveyor I held his written judgemnets as the clearest and most logical deerivations of scant and often inadequate statute. His rantings in case law are partly what triggered the current statutory position for judicial review. But I bet if Denning was still around he'd now caveat his previous position along the lines of what I've said above. The remedy (or even the action) might not be to have a TPO set aside, but the wronged owner would get some kind of redress. Your 6 weeks is not the end of it. It's just the end of the High Court. In England. For now. I could have got by without your last paragraph, but now that you mention it, when statutes contain mistakes, who plugs the gaps? The courts. They are reluctant to interfere with the exercise of statutory discretion, but they never stand by when potentially endemic unfairness emerges. Thus the judiciary is actively involved in helping and making the law evolve. I have more faith in them than I have in Parliament.
  4. I D this tree please

    Might be Betula x aurata, the hybrid between Silver and Downy Birch. Definitely leaves are too rounded to be pendula, but the bar is too rugged to be pubescens. I see these hybrids quite often, they really are halfway between Silver and Downy, in every way.
  5. fungal induced habitat

    Spore..k?
  6. Is "Cordwood" really a thing?

    Cheek! I don't know, there was no agreement. Non sawmill and non-brash, everything stackable in between? The stuff I like because you can usually get away with not having to split it.
  7. Tricky TPO situation

    I expect our disagreement on this comes from a difference between scottish law and English. The appeal court in Scotland is the Court of Session. We have similar substantive and procedural Ultra Vires tests grounds for appeal against a TPO. In both Scotland and England the 6 weeek period stars from when the Order is confirmed, but clearly if the owner or intersted party was not advised of the confirmation of the Order, there would be procedural Ultra Vires and the right of appeal would subsist beyond the 6 week period. In England I really don't know if it would be taken by the High Court or by the Court of Appeal, since the High Court woud have no statutory basis to take it. Whichever court took it, I hope it's clear that since it would be the interested party's first appeal, it could be made on either procedural or substantive grounds, and if it were the Court of Appeal, the matter could be deferred to the High Court to deal with the substantive issues. The Law Commision's review of these sorts of rules in 1994 neither ruled in or ruled out the need for a Court of Appeal appeal (whether in the aforegoing scenario or otherwise), but if there was a public interest to be served a common law natural justice appeal would I expect and hope be accepted. One must always remember that the actions of courts can be the subject of appeal, and quite rightly, because they can and occasionally do interpret and apply the law incorrectly. Perhaps partly because of this moot point, Mynors (1st edition) mentions that the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 allowed appeals only if the High Court gives permission, thus satisfying the public interest aspect. As the 1st edition suggests, I believe this has been replaced by changes to the Rules of the Supreme Court. I haven't followed this up, sincerely hoping never to need to know the nitty gritty. And back to the beginning, the Court of Session in Scotland is the statutory court of appeal in the first instance but may (in the inner house) also take a natural justice appeal of the type I am referring to or any other breach of natural justice or the questioning of the validity of an appeal decision in the outer house. Clear as mud! In noted in passing an error in the english Regulations, Regulation 8(a)(iii) refers to s.284(a), I think it should be s.284(1). Just goes to show, even statutory laws can be flawed. So, a TPO could be challenged after the 6 weeks, if the High Court (or Court of Session?) was unsure of its interpretation, or if the Order had not been served correctly.
  8. Is "Cordwood" really a thing?

    Indeed, indeed... It's really simple. A Cord is a volume of wood. Cordwood is a type of wood. Cordwood may or not be sold by the Cord. Trying to link the definitions of Cord and Cordwood just because they both have 'Cord' in them seems, beyond that, pointless.
  9. Tricky TPO situation

    I reckon some praise is due to Edward C for taking the time to set out the situation clearly. It's as good a treatise as I have seen anywhere on the internet. As for axe-grinding, that's irrelevant and distracting. The law is the law. But there's a wee clarification due. It's true the validity of an Order can only be challenged in the High Court, namely challenges of the lawfulness of the processes followed on making the Order. But that's not the end of it. A TPO can be challended on judicial review, rare and expensive and risky as this may seem. The Council's actions are subject, like everythign else they do, to common law rules of natural justice, and if they have made an Order based on no evidence or the decision to make the Order is was unreasonable or if spurious and irrelevant factors have been taken into account and swayed the decision to make an Order which otherwise wouldn't have ben made, a challenge may succeed. There is theoretically no time limit for a judicial review. The odds are stacked in favour of the Council only insofar as raising a judicial review is a hideously expensive business. Up here in Scotland challenges on planning appeal decisions are not at all uncommon, but there's usually £millions of development value at stake. Awards of expenses usually follow success, but not always, and not always completely. It's a bit of an expensive gamble. Would-be litigants must provide their own salt.
  10. Is "Cordwood" really a thing?

    I think the etymology of quintal is from the word 'cent-' meaning hundred, rahtehr than 'quint-' menaing five. If you remember those teeny wee Fiats called the 500, pronounced 'seeng-co-chen-tay', the chen-tay it is hundred, and the pronounciation of it is a lot more like quinte than the 'seeng-co' bit is. The first guy that paid for an imperial quintal and got a metric one must have been well pleased. It's basically twice as big.
  11. Interesting Biomechanics

    Costa Teguise, Lanzarote.
  12. CCTV in TPO tree

    That's the point. Is it wilfiul? As I see it, if the intention is to mount a camera rahter than to damage or destroy a tree, and you have taken reasonable precautions to minimise damage and to make the damage incidental to the purpose of the installation, I cna't see how it can damage the public amentiy that the tree provides. There shouldn't therefore be a case for prosecution.
  13. CCTV in TPO tree

    This was done almost to death recently on the UKTC forum. Almost. There are ways of attaching things to trees that do minimal damage and ways that do a whole lot of damage. The question is, is the damage wilful? If you could do it in a way that would cause minimal damage, do it that way. If you know how to do ity that way but you choose to do it badly or a worse way, theres a weak legal argument that says you could be prosecuted. If you do it badly, knowing it is going to damage a tree, you're a bad person and a prosecution might stick because it's (a) wilful and (b) damage. Strap it on, and adjust it as the tree expands. If not, bolt it on with alloy or galvanised fixings that allow the fitting to move as the tree grows.
  14. Interesting Biomechanics

    Dunno if this counts for this section of the site.
  15. TPO prosecution

    Poole, Dorset, the same place as R v Davey when a guy was fined £150k in 2013 for felling a TPO'd pine. Ahh, the power of court decisions to deter others from offending! Looks like Poole is the new capital of conifer mullering and tree-owner twattery.

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×