The complete UK guide to neighbour tree and hedge disputes

Summary of English and Welsh law about trees and hedges on a neighbour's property

In England and Wales, there is no general common law right to require a neighbour to reduce the height of a tree on their land. However, a homeowner may bring a civil claim in private nuisance if tree roots or branches cause physical damage to their property or unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of land. 

The affected homeowner has a common law right of abatement (self-help) to cut back overhanging branches or encroaching roots to the boundary without the tree owner's consent, though consent may be required if the tree is protected. Remedies for nuisance include injunctions to compel pruning or felling, and damages for the cost of remedial works. 

Individual trees are not subject to any statutory height limit, unlike high hedges formed by a line of two or more evergreen or semi-evergreen trees or shrubs exceeding two metres in height, which may be addressed through a complaint to the local authority under Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003. 

Before carrying out any works to a neighbour's tree, homeowners must check whether the tree is protected by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) or located in a conservation area, whether a felling licence is required, and whether the works could disturb protected wildlife such as nesting birds or bats, as unauthorised works may result in criminal prosecution and unlimited fines. 

If no agreement can be reached, escalation options include negotiation or mediation, a high hedges complaint to the local authority if applicable, enforcement action by the planning authority for TPO or conservation area breaches, and civil proceedings in nuisance seeking an injunction or damages, though costs recovery on the small claims track is limited.

English and Welsh law on neighbour tree and hedge disputes in detail

Neighbour tree disputes

What is liability in nuisance for tree encroachment and damage?

Private nuisance is usually caused by a person doing something on their own land which they are lawfully entitled to do, but which wrongfully interferes with the ordinary use and enjoyment of neighbouring land, for example by causing physical damage. Roots and branches of a tree on one property may cause private nuisance to the owner of neighbouring land if they cause physical damage to land or buildings, or interfere unreasonably with the owner's enjoyment of the land 

What liability do neighbours have for tree roots and branches?

Tree roots can cause direct damage to underground structures such as drains or foundations, and can also cause indirect damage by affecting the water content of clay soil through transpiration, leading to shrinkage and swelling that results in settlement or subsidence. Subterranean tree route barriers can be installed to manage tree root growth and prevent damage to hardscapes and structures.

The leading case on damage to property caused by encroaching tree roots is Delaware Mansions v Westminster City Council [2001] UKHL 55, in which the House of Lords formulated a test to be used when considering a tree root damage case. The claimant freeholder was entitled to recover costs reasonably incurred in remedying damage caused by encroaching tree roots despite the fact that the damage appeared in substance to have occurred before its acquisition of the freehold. The House of Lords held that the continuing presence of the tree amounted to a continuing nuisance since it continued to draw water from the claimant's land, and the mere fact that some of the damage may have been caused prior to the claimant's ownership did not negate that conclusion. 

What is the duty between neighbours regarding trees?

The duty of the tree owner is to do what is reasonable in all the circumstances to prevent or minimise the risk of interference with or damage to the property of the neighbour where the tree owner knew of the encroachment of the tree roots or branches, or ought to have been aware of their encroachment, and there was a reasonably foreseeable risk of damage to the neighbouring property or enjoyment of it as a result of such encroachment. 

The tree owner must know, or ought to know, of the presence of the roots and the risk they pose, which is the test applied to all natural sources of nuisance. The risk must be one which a reasonable person in the tree owner's position would have regarded as a real risk, not just a vague possibility.

In Berent v Family Mosaic Housing and another [2012] EWCA Civ 961, the Court of Appeal accepted that a risk had to be a real risk and not just a theoretical risk, meaning it must have been possible to identify the relevant trees as posing a greater risk than other trees. 

In Robbins v London Borough of Bexley [2012] EWHC 2257 (TCC), the defendant was liable because it had noticed that certain trees were causing damage in the area, making it reasonably foreseeable that a property within a specified distance of one of those trees was at real risk of damage.

What evidence do you have to produce in a neighbour tree dispute? Causation and practical steps

The claimant must prove that the damage was caused by the tree roots. In Loftus-Brigham v London Borough of Ealing [2003] EWCA Civ 1490, the court concluded that the correct test for establishing causation was whether desiccation from the tree roots had materially contributed to the damage to the neighbouring property; it does not have to be the only cause. If a risk to property is reasonably foreseeable, the question arises whether there are any reasonable steps that can be taken to minimise the risk. Tree owners are not expected to remove all of their trees on suspicion that a small number of them might cause damage to neighbouring properties. Often monitoring is required over the period of 12 months to establish whether tree roots are causing damage, or whether there are any other intervening factors. 

What is the Common Law Right of Abatement and how does this apply to neighbour tree disputes? 

Abatement is the right of the owner of the neighbouring land to cut back the encroaching roots or branches back to the boundary between its property and the land on which the tree stands. The neighbouring owner does not need consent from the tree owner before exercising the right of abatement, though it may be prudent to seek this. Abatement is more often referred to in the context of overhanging branches, as established in Lemmon v Webb [1895] AC 1 HL, but is also available to cut back encroaching roots, as recognised in McCombe v Read [1955] 2QB 429.

The right of abatement is subject to some limitations. The cutting back must not be so severe that it makes the tree unstable or causes it to die, meaning that except where the work is minor, it may be prudent for the neighbouring owner to seek professional advice from an arboriculturist first on the best alternatives. The branches and roots which are cut off must be returned to the tree owner to avoid claims of conversion or theft. If the tree is subject to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO), consent will be required before the branches or roots can be cut back, unless the work falls within a statutory exception.

Where there is a continuing nuisance of which the defendant knew or ought to have known, reasonable remedial expenditure may be recovered by the owner who has had to incur it to abate a nuisance, even if the damage was caused before the owner's period of ownership began, though recovery of the expenditure will be dependent on the defendant being given notice of the nuisance and an opportunity to abate it.

What remedies are there in neighbour tree disputes? Injunctions and damages

Nuisance is actionable in tort, and a claimant can take civil proceedings against a defendant for either or both injunctive relief to abate a continuing nuisance and prevent its recurrence, and damages to compensate for their loss. An injunction can be used to force the tree owner to prune the tree, as in Paterson v Humberside County Council (1995) 12 Const LJ 64, or to force the tree owner to cut the tree down, as in Elliott v Islington London Borough Council [1991] 1 EGLR 167.

If the encroaching tree roots have not yet caused damage, injunctive relief may be available to prevent harm from occurring, though the courts have proceeded cautiously when asked to grant a quia timet injunction and have historically needed to be satisfied that the risk of actual damage occurring is both imminent and real. In London Borough of Islington v Elliott and another [2012] EWCA Civ 56, the Court of Appeal held that mandatory injunctions of this kind were not justified on the ground that, if nothing is done, a tree on neighbouring land may at some point in the future begin to cause damage to the claimant's property, and should be restricted to cases where the risk of damage is particularly imminent and the defendant obviously intransigent. However, in Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Williams [2018] EWCA Civ 1514, the Court of Appeal noted that it is possible that requiring proof of imminent physical injury or harm is too prescriptive and that what matters is the probability and likely gravity of damage rather than simply its imminence.

The damages available to the claimant will generally be the reasonable cost of the work required to return the property to its state of repair before the damage occurred, including where it is reasonable to do such work, the cost of stabilising the foundations of the property. If damage has occurred, it is necessary to consider whether the owner of the neighbouring property has acted in a reasonable way in response to that damage. The normal response to harm or potential harm would be to notify the tree owner of the problem to enable the owner to take action to avoid the problem becoming any worse.

Is there a general legal limit on tree height?

There is no common law right to reduce the height of a hedge that is growing on land owned by another person. Individual trees are not subject to any general statutory height limit. Tree branches are unlikely to cause a private nuisance unless they encroach beyond the boundary of the land on which they grow. Overhanging branches can lead to claims by the owner of the neighbouring property for nuisance or negligence if they cause physical damage to structures on that adjoining property, and they fall off and cause physical damage or personal injury. In addition to nuisance or negligence claims, overhanging branches may lead to claims for trespass into the neighbouring owner's airspace or obstruction of the neighbour's right of light to windows in their building.

Neighbour high hedge disputes

What is The Statutory High Hedges Regime?

Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act (ABA) 2003 gives local councils powers to deal with complaints about high hedges that adversely affect the reasonable enjoyment of residential property. It applies in England and Wales. If the parties cannot negotiate their own solution, it may be possible to resolve matters using the ABA 2003 procedure. Before complaining to the council, the owner or occupier of the affected property must have taken all reasonable steps to resolve matters.

What is the definition of a high hedge?

For the purposes of Part 8 of the ABA 2003, to be a high hedge, the hedge must be a barrier to light that meets both of the following requirements: it is formed wholly or predominantly by a line of two or more evergreen or semi-evergreen trees or shrubs (evergreens), and it is more than two metres high when measured from ground level. The hedge will not be regarded as a barrier to light if there are gaps in the hedge above the two-metre mark which significantly affect the overall effect by allowing light through. There is no right to complain under Part 8 of the ABA 2003 about problems with roots of a high hedge.

What are the legal grounds for complaint about a high hedge?

The council will only consider a complaint if all the following apply: the complaint is made by an owner or occupier of a domestic property, the complainant alleges that their reasonable enjoyment of their domestic property is adversely affected by the height of a high hedge, and the high hedge is situated on land owned or occupied by another person. The height of the high hedge must adversely affect the complainant's reasonable enjoyment of their domestic property, including reasonable enjoyment of part of the property. When deciding whether reasonable enjoyment is adversely affected, the council will consider what is reasonable in all the circumstances, including the amenity value of the hedge to its owner and to the wider neighbourhood.

What is the requirement to negotiate before making a formal complaint about a high hedge?

Before making a formal complaint to the council, the owner or occupier of the affected property must take all reasonable steps to resolve matters by negotiation with the owner or occupier of the land on which the hedge is situated. This might involve a letter, informal discussion or even mediation where appropriate. A potential complainant should record all negotiation attempts, as these records will support a formal complaint to the council. The council will reject a high hedges complaint if it considers that the complainant has not taken all reasonable steps to negotiate an informal solution.

How do councils respond to formal complaints about high hedges?

The council will respond to a high hedges complaint by either rejecting the complaint, suggesting further action for the complainant to take to resolve the issue, or considering the complaint further under section 68(3) of the ABA 2003 and deciding whether to issue a remedial notice. A remedial notice is a notice issued by the council under section 69 of the ABA 2003 which records the council's decision that the hedge is adversely affecting the complainant's reasonable enjoyment of their property, specifies the action required to remedy that effect, and sets the deadline for compliance.

What is a high hedge remedial notice and what limitations do they face?  

While a remedial notice can require a hedge to be reduced in height, this cannot be to less than two metres above ground level, nor can it specify that the hedge be removed. A remedial notice is a local land charge and is binding on every owner or occupier for the time being of the land on which the hedge is situated. Compliance with a remedial notice is the responsibility of the owner or occupier for the time being of the land on which the hedge is situated, including any successors to the persons who owned or occupied when the remedial notice was issued. It is a criminal offence to fail to take action in accordance with a remedial notice.

What is the appeal process against a high hedge remedial notice? 

The complainant or the owner or occupier of the land on which the hedge is situated can appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against either the issue of a remedial notice or the withdrawal of a remedial notice, or the waiver or relaxation of its requirements. The complainant can also appeal against a council's unfavourable decision under section 68(3) of the ABA 2003, though the complainant cannot appeal against a council's rejection of a complaint at the outset. Appeals must be made within 28 days from the relevant date using the correct prescribed form.

What checks do I need to carry out before undertaking work on a neighbour’s tree or hedge? Pre-work checks: tree protection and wildlife legislation

Before carrying out any works to a neighbour's tree, whether by way of abatement or otherwise, homeowners must check whether the tree is subject to legal protections that require consent or impose restrictions on the timing and manner of works.

What is a Tree Preservation Order?

A Tree Preservation Order (TPO) is an order made by a local planning authority in respect of an individual tree, groups of trees or woodland to protect trees of amenity value to local communities. A TPO prohibits any of the following actions to happen to a protected tree without the local planning authority's consent: cutting down, topping, lopping, uprooting, wilful damage, and wilful destruction. The cutting of roots also requires consent. An application for consent must be made to the local planning authority before any works can be carried out on a tree covered by a TPO.

Consent is not required for the cutting down, topping, lopping or uprooting of a tree so far as may be necessary for the prevention or abatement of a nuisance. In England, the authority for this is regulation 14(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation) (England) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/605). However, case law shows that this does not inevitably permit felling or extensive pruning, as other methods of resolving the nuisance must be considered, including underpinning the damaged property.

We had a case recently where an oak tree had grown to such an extent that it was blocking a driveway. The oak tree was subject to a TPO and whilst we were eventually permitted to cut back the tree, it was not a simple process and took a long time to obtain permission, with the expert evidence of an arboriculturist required. 

A criminal offence is committed when anyone, in contravention of a TPO or tree preservation regulations, cuts down, uproots or wilfully destroys a tree, tops, lops or wilfully damages a tree in a way that is likely to destroy it, or causes or permits such activities. This is an offence of strict liability, and liability can be incurred without knowing that the tree in question is protected by a TPO. Anyone found guilty of this offence is liable, if convicted, to an unlimited fine. In R v Sukh Chamdal [2025] EWCA Crim 1384, the Court of Appeal upheld a £200,000 fine where the defendant had pleaded guilty to causing or permitting the unlawful felling of approximately 132 TPO protected trees.

What protections are there for trees in conservation areas?

Trees in conservation areas that are not protected by tree preservation orders are subject to similar restrictions. Anyone proposing to cut down or carry out work on a tree in a conservation area that is not protected by a TPO must give the local planning authority six weeks prior notice under section 211 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. This enables the local planning authority to decide whether the tree or trees in question should be made subject to a TPO Trees in Conservation Areas. A section 211 notice does not have to be in a particular form, but must describe the proposed works and include sufficient information to identify the trees. A section 211 notice does not have to be given where consent would not be required if the tree was protected by a TPO Trees in Conservation Areas.

Can I fell a tree myself? Forestry Act Felling Licences

A licence is required from the Forestry Commission to fell any tree unless a valid exemption applies, and it is an offence to fell a tree without a licence, exemption or valid permission. Exceptions from tree felling licence are listed in section 9 of the Forestry Act 1967 and include a calendar quarter personal allowance (in any calendar quarter, a landowner may fell up to 5 cubic metres of growing trees on their property without a felling licence, provided that no more than 2m³ are sold), lopping and topping, trees of small diameter, and certain tree species and locations. An exception also applies where the felling of trees is immediately required for the purpose of carrying out development authorised by the approval of full planning permission.

What wildlife protections impact neighbour tree and hedge disputes?

Before pruning off overhanging branches or cutting back roots, homeowners must check that there are no nesting birds to avoid impact to nesting birds and infringement of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) 1981 and breaching the Birds Directive (2009/147/EC). The Royal Society of the Protection of Birds recommends that tree cutting is avoided between March and August as this is the main breeding season for nesting birds. Sections 1 to 8 of the WCA 1981 implement the key wild bird protection measures required under the Birds Directive in England and Wales, including offences of intentionally killing, injuring or taking wild birds and taking, damaging or destroying eggs or nests.

It is an offence to deliberately capture, injure, disturb or kill a wild European protected species of animal, including bats, their eggs or breeding site or resting place under regulation 43 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (SI 2017/1012). In December 2020, Woolwich Crown Court ordered housebuilders, Bellway Homes Limited, to pay a record fine of £600,000 for the offence of damaging or destroying a breeding site or resting place for bats, a European protected species. A person guilty of an offence under sections 9 to 13 of the WCA 1981 (animal and plant offences) is liable on summary conviction to up to six months' imprisonment or an unlimited fine, or both.

What are the options if you can’t reach an agreement with your neighbour over a tree or hedge?

If the parties cannot reach agreement about tree height or pruning through informal negotiation, several escalation options are available depending on the nature of the dispute.

1. Negotiation and Mediation: Parties are encouraged to consider whether negotiation or some other form of alternative dispute resolution might enable them to settle their dispute without commencing proceedings. Before making a formal complaint to the council under the high hedges regime, the owner or occupier of the affected property must take all reasonable steps to resolve matters by negotiation with the owner or occupier of the land on which the hedge is situated, which might involve a letter, informal discussion or even mediation where appropriate.
2. High Hedges Complaint to Local Authority: If the dispute concerns a high hedge that meets the definition in Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, and negotiation has failed, the complainant may make a complaint to the local authority in whose area the hedge is situated. A high hedges complaint under Part 8 of the ABA 2003 must be made in writing; most councils prefer the complainant to complete the council's own high hedges complaints form, submitted to the council in whose area the hedge is situated, accompanied by the correct fee, and copied to the owner and any occupiers of the land on which the hedge is situated. The council will only consider a complaint if the complainant has taken all reasonable steps to resolve the matter another way.
3. Planning Authority Enforcement for TPO or Conservation Area Breaches: If unauthorised works have been carried out to a tree protected by a TPO or located in a conservation area, the local planning authority has enforcement powers. To bring a successful prosecution, the local planning authority should have sufficient evidence to show that the defendant has carried out, caused or permitted work listed in section 210 of the TCPA 1990, the tree was protected by a TPO at the time of the works, the works were carried out by the defendant, the works were not subject to any exception, and the works were carried out without consent.
4. Civil Claim in Nuisance or Trespass: If the tree is causing or threatening to cause nuisance through physical damage or unreasonable interference, the affected homeowner may bring civil proceedings in nuisance seeking an injunction to compel the tree owner to take action and damages to compensate for loss.

If you have a dispute with your neighbour and are looking for legal advice, contact Mustafa Sidki in our Dispute Resolution team on 020 8461 6140.