R v Alath Construction Ltd ; R v Brightman
Language: English Series: Weekly Law Reports ; (1990) 1 WLR 1255-1260(6)Publication details: 1990Subject(s): Summary: CA 20 February 1990. A beech tree , standing on A`s land was subject of a tree preservation order . A made a number of unsuccessful applications for permission to fell the tree. After the storms of 1987 A made arrangements for the tree to be felled without obtaining permission. They were charged with contravening a TPO under Town and Country Planning Act 1971 s102 . S60 of that Act provides that a TPO should not apply to the felling of trees that are dying, dead or dangerous. The recorder made a preliminary ruling that the burden of proof lay on A and they were convicted. A`s appeal was quashed on the grounds that s120 created an absolute offence therefore the prosecution had only to prove that the act was committed, s60 did not create negative ingredients of the offence but provided a true exemption from liability which had to be proved by A.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS43560 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 42351-1001 |
CA 20 February 1990. A beech tree , standing on A`s land was subject of a tree preservation order . A made a number of unsuccessful applications for permission to fell the tree. After the storms of 1987 A made arrangements for the tree to be felled without obtaining permission. They were charged with contravening a TPO under Town and Country Planning Act 1971 s102 . S60 of that Act provides that a TPO should not apply to the felling of trees that are dying, dead or dangerous. The recorder made a preliminary ruling that the burden of proof lay on A and they were convicted. A`s appeal was quashed on the grounds that s120 created an absolute offence therefore the prosecution had only to prove that the act was committed, s60 did not create negative ingredients of the offence but provided a true exemption from liability which had to be proved by A.