header-logo header-logo

Japanese knotweed claim upheld

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll