000			01538cab a2200229 4500
001			ABS67396
008			040205n2003 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u125070
100			_aLindsey, S.
245			_aMaterial matters that get to the root of the problem
260			_c2003
490			_aArchitects' Journal _v218(22) 18/25 December 2003, 50(1)
520			_aExamines the the increase in claims for subsidence damage caused by tree roots, after the long, dry summer of 2003. In "Rupert St John Loftus-Brigham and Another v London Borough of Ealing" ([2003] EWCA Civ 1490, unreported) the judge held that the claimants had failed to discharge the burden of proving that cracks in their house caused by subsidence resulted from desiccation of the sub-soil attributable to the root activity of the council's trees. Experts agreed that the creepers at the front of the house had at least contributed to the damage. On appeal, the claimants argued that the judge applied the wrong test and should have concluded that the council's trees were an effective and substantial cause of the subsidence. A rehearing has been allowed. View judgment at www.bailii.org.
590			_aABS
590			_aABS
650			_aLOFTUS-BRIGHAM AND ANOTHER V EALING LBC
650			_aSUBSIDENCE DAMAGE
650			_aTREE ROOT CLAIMS
690			_aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING PATHOLOGY
856			_uhttps://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/1490.html _zView the judgment on the BAILII website...
942			_n0
999			_c74135 _d74135