London Borough of Islington v Elliott & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 56 (01 February 2012)
Quia timet relief was not necessary as the Council had resolved to remove the trees before trial, and the claimants failed to show imminent danger requiring an injunction. Costs should not be awarded to claimants for period prior to service of defence; Council entitled to costs thereafter.
- Citation
- [2012] EWCA Civ 56
- Parties
- Appellant/defendant: London Borough of Islington; Respondent/claimant: Margaret Elliott; Respondent/claimant: Peter Morris
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 01 February 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Nuisance, Quia Timet Injunction, Costs, Tree Root Damage
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
London Borough of Islington
Appellant/defendant
Margaret Elliott
Respondent/claimant
Peter Morris
Respondent/claimant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a quia timet injunction can be granted when no physical damage has yet occurred but is likely unless prevented
- 2 Appropriate costs order when nuisance is remedied before trial
Ratio Decidendi
Quia timet relief was not necessary as the Council had resolved to remove the trees before trial, and the claimants failed to show imminent danger requiring an injunction. Costs should not be awarded to claimants for period prior to service of defence; Council entitled to costs thereafter.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- No order for costs up to and including service of defence
- Council entitled to costs of action after service of defence
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment