header-logo header-logo

05 July 2018
Issue: 7800 / Categories: Legal News , Environment , Property
printer mail-detail

Japanese knotweed claim upheld

nlj_7800_news_1

Court rules in favour of homeowners under siege

Property owners can claim damages for Japanese knotweed, the Court of Appeal has held in a landmark case.

Two householders in Wales succeeded in their claim this week against Network Rail after their properties were affected by the plant, which spreads quickly through its underground roots (rhizomes), is difficult to treat, blocks drains, undermines walls and overwhelms outbuildings. The bamboo-like perennial had been present on land directly behind their bungalows for 50 years.

Giving the lead judgment in Network Rail v Williams and Waistell [2018] EWCA Civ 1514, Sir Terence Etherton, the Master of the Rolls, held the effects of Japanese knotweed can give rise to a claim in the tort of private nuisance.

He rejected the county court’s ruling that the tort arose from the reduced market value of the claimants’ homes. Instead, he upheld the claim on the basis the encroachment of the Japanese knotweed rhizomes had diminished the claimants’ ability to enjoy the amenity and utility of their properties.

‘The purpose of the tort of nuisance is not to protect the value of property as an investment or a financial asset,’ he said.

‘Its purpose is to protect the owner of land (or a person entitled to exclusive possession) in their use and enjoyment of the land as such as a facet of the right of ownership or right to exclusive possession.’

Sir Terence held that actual damage was not required to found a claim, however the knotweed must encroach, or at least threaten to encroach, on the claimant’s property.

Rodger Burnett, solicitor at Charles Lyndon, who acted for Waistell, said: ‘For far too long landowners like Network Rail have paid scant regard to the impact that their failure to adequately treat Japanese knotweed has had on adjoining properties. 

‘Hopefully now organisations like Network Rail will take their responsibilities seriously.’

Issue: 7800 / Categories: Legal News , Environment , Property
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll