Speak to our friendly staff directly  +44 (0)20 7242 2523

A leading set specialising in commercial, construction, insurance and property law

Insights
This document is from our archive and no action should be taken in reliance on it without specific legal advice.

Property Law - Perrin & Another v Northampton Borough Council

Area(s) of Law :
Property Law
Court :
Source : EWCA Civ 1353

Planning
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.