000			01648cad a22002055a 4500
001			L142708
008			080303e20070719xxk f w 000 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u142708
041	0		_aeng
245	0	0	_aPerrin and another v Northampton BC _h[electronic resource]
260			_c2007
520			_a[2007] EWCA Civ 1353, 19 December 2007. Considers the meaning of the construction of section 198(6)(b) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Considers whether the cutting of a tree which was the subject of a Tree Preservation Order was necessary for abatement of a nuisance, or whether it was permissible to consider other means of alleviating the nuisance. The appellant local authority (N) appealed against a decision (L135440) holding that the felling of a tree whose roots had caused damage to the respondent (P)'s land was necessary for the abatement of nuisance, even given that other works were possible to resolve the issue. "Held": On considering the purpose of tree preservation orders it was not considered necessary to remove the tree entirely to abate the nuisance. The judge had erred in his findings. Alternative works such as the construction of a root barrier were sufficient to resolve the situation. Appeal allowed.
590			_aKA
650	2	4	_aPERRIN AND ANOTHER V NORTHAMPTON BC
650	2	4	_aTOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 S198(6)(B)
651		4	_aEngland and Wales _y1543-
690			_aENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CONSULTANCY-PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT-DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/1353.html _zView the judgment free of charge at www.bailii.org...
942			_n0
999			_c79916 _d79916