UK: Judge rules that the smallest sapling was, legally speaking, a tree.

The judge thought it necessary to spell out the exact legal definition
of a tree because of confusion in the planning process. While trees
could obviously be the object of tree preservation orders, the
question remained about the status of saplings. For clarity the judge
ruled that size did not matter, and that the smallest sapling was,
legally speaking, a tree.

Get full text; support writer, producer of the words:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/4613654/Judge-takes-12000-words-to-define-a-tree.html

His conclusion clashes with that of Lord Denning, a former Master of
the Rolls, who ruled that a tree was only a tree if its trunk had a
diameter of at least seven inches. In opening his judgment Mr Justice
Cranston said: “What is a tree? In particular does it include a young
tree, a sapling?” He continued: “On one occasion Lord Denning said
emphatically that many saplings were not trees and that in woodland a
tree was something over seven or eight inches, 180 to 200mm, in
diameter.”

The issue arose in the case on which he was ruling, because while section 198 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 provided for tree preservation orders (TPOs) to preserve trees, groups of trees and woodlands, he said that there was “no statutory definition of a tree”. He concluded that “with tree preservation orders there are no limitations in terms of size for what is to be treated as a tree. In other words, saplings are trees”. The case was brought by a developer
who had challenged a Government decision to not allow works in a young
patch of woodland in North Halling, by the River Medway in Kent. Palm
Developments Ltd bought the site in 2001 and applied for permission to
use the land as a commercial wharf. Before the Second World War it was
an industrial site but then it was abandoned, leaving a succession of
trees to grow up.

Get full text; support writer, producer of the words:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/4613654/Judge-takes-12000-words-to-define-a-tree.html

Leave a comment

Your comment