Woodhams v Chichester District Council [2008] EWLands LCA_167_2006 (14 March 2008)

Woodhams v Chichester District Council [2008] EWLands LCA_167_2006 (14 March 2008)

Claimant failed to provide adequate evidence that refusal to fell T2 caused or risked causing compensable loss; absence of intrusive investigation rendered risk speculative; claim for compensation dismissed.

Citation
[2008] EWLands LCA_167_2006
Parties
Claimant: David T Woodhams; Compensating Authority: Chichester District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Compensation Claim Under Town and Country Planning Act 1990 S.203 / Final Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Tree Preservation Order, Refusal of Consent, Subsidence and Heave Insurance, Property Blight, Diminution in Value
Property Law Planning Law Compensation Law Tree Preservation Order Refusal of Consent Subsidence and Heave Insurance Property Blight Diminution in Value

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David T Woodhams

Claimant

Chichester District Council

Compensating Authority

Procedural Posture

Compensation Claim Under Town and Country Planning Act 1990 S.203 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal of consent to fell oak tree T2 caused compensable loss to claimant
  2. 2 Whether blight and diminution in value were caused by refusal
  3. 3 Whether evidence established risk or damage to property from tree T2

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant failed to provide adequate evidence that refusal to fell T2 caused or risked causing compensable loss; absence of intrusive investigation rendered risk speculative; claim for compensation dismissed.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed