An Ealing couple have been awarded £66,000 in compensation from their local borough council for the damage caused to their home by council-owned trees.
The Court of Appeal has allowed the couple’s appeal against Central London County Court’s dismissal of their claim, and has ordered the county court to rehear the case.
Rupert and Suzanne St John Loftus-Brigham claimed that three lime trees and a plane tree, removed by the council in 1999, had caused structural damage to their house, leaving them with a substantial bill for repairs and alternative accommodation.
The county court found that there was a “real possibility that a range of vegetation contributed to a greater or lesser degree to what had occurred” and that the claimants “needed to show that the defendants’ trees were probably the dominant cause”.
Challenging that ruling in the Court of Appeal, Deborah Taylor, counsel for the claimants, said: “Having found that there was a real possibility of a range of vegetation contributing to a greater or lesser degree to what had occurred, the judge failed to consider whether each should be discarded as a cause, or whether two or more jointly contributed to the damage.”
Allowing the couple’s appeal, Chadwick LJ said: “We are satisfied that the judge erred in his approach to the question of whether the tree roots, in law, caused the damage complained of. The question that he should have asked himself was: whether desiccation from the tree roots materially contributed to the damage. His judgment therefore cannot stand.”
St John Loftus-Brigham and another v Ealing London Borough Council Court of Appeal (Chadwick and Buxton LJJ) 28 October 2003.
Deborah Taylor (instructed by Gaston Whybrew, of Colchester) appeared for the appellants; Simon Brown and Kim Franklin (instructed by Vizards Wyeth) appeared for the respondents.
References: EGi Legal News 29/10/03
