Please correct me if I have misinterpreted the appeal decision.
As I understand it, in the Secretary of State's opinion Northampton were
correct in issuing an Article 5 Certificate and refusing consent to fell
when there were alternative engineering solutions to abate the
actionable nuisance, particularly when such solutions were of less value
than retaining the tree.
I think I've answered my previous questions.
1) Does this mean that it is acceptable for engineering solutions to be
an alternative to the cutting down, uprooting, topping or lopping of a
tree in order to abate an actionable nuisance?
A) Yes, if there is an alternative of lesser value.
2) If the alternative engineering solutions are necessary are LPA are
not liable for compensation if consent is refused for the cutting down,
uprooting, topping or lopping of a tree?
A) Yes, if an Article 5 has been issued.
The information contained in this email or any of its attachments
may be privileged or confidential and is intended for the exclusive
use of the addressee. Any unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you
receive this email by mistake, please advise the sender immediately
by using the reply facility in your email software and then delete
this email. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not
use, retain or disclose any information contained in this e-mail.
Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and
do not necessarily represent those of Suffolk Coastal District
Council. The Council reserves the right to monitor email
communications on any part of its network.
Suffolk Coastal District Council cannot guarantee that this message
or any of its attachments has reached you complete and/or virus free
and advises you to carry out appropriate virus checks.
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre