Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

A woodland TRN cannot require more trees to be planted than were removed, but estimation based on standard planting densities is lawful where precise numbers are unavailable. The statutory term 'tree' includes seedlings as well as saplings, and the inspector's reliance on this interpretation and estimation method was lawful. The burden of proof rests on the landowner to show the TRN exceeds the number of trees lost.

Parties: Appellant: Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Limited; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government; Second Respondent: Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 08 December 2015
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Tree Preservation Orders, Tree Replacement Notices, Statutory Interpretation, Burden of Proof

Planning Law Environmental Law Tree Preservation Orders Tree Replacement Notices Statutory Interpretation Burden of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Limited

Appellant

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

First Respondent

Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether a Tree Replacement Notice (TRN) can require the planting of more trees than were removed under a woodland Tree Preservation Order (TPO)
2 Whether the inspector lawfully estimated the number of trees lost
3 Whether 'tree' under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 includes seedlings

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed