A perennial problem: tree root nuisance
Damage caused to property by tree roots is a problem often encountered by land owners, occupiers and developers. All too often, damage goes unchecked and unmitigated because the legal principles for establishing liability are not straightforward and because sensitivities can arise, particularly where the properties and parties involved are residential neighbours.
In Khan v Harrow Council and Anor, the second defendant (Mrs Kane) admitted that subsidence to the claimants’ (Mr and Mrs Khan’s) property had been caused by a hedge and/or an oak tree on her land. However, Mrs Kane denied liability using the technical legal arguments that the damage was not reasonably foreseeable to her as an ordinary individual owner of a domestic property and that Mr and Mrs Khan were contributorily negligent for failing to alert her to damage being caused.
The general principle founding liability for nuisance (including tree root damage) is that it must be reasonably foreseeable that the existing factual circumstances represent a genuine risk of damage. A person is liable ‘if he does not take steps to eliminate a risk that he knows or ought to know is a real risk and not a mere possibility’…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Walker Morris briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Walker Morris
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Walker Morris
A misrepresentation is a statement that induces entry into a contract and that turns out to be false.
Marshalling is an equitable remedy for achieving fairness between two or more secured creditors of the same debtor.
Analysis from The Lawyer
The law school war shows no signs of ending. But we have, perhaps, reached the end of the beginning.
New EU rules and lawyers’ increased comfort with digital formats are sparking a sea-change in the way law firms manage their documents