Neighbours Face Quarter-Million-Pound Court Bill Over Leylandii Tree Destruction
Three siblings are facing a potentially ruinous court bill of up to £250,000 after a judge ruled they trespassed into their neighbours' garden and carried out what was described as the "systematic destruction" of a row of 33-foot Leylandii trees. The bitter boundary dispute, which erupted in the Essex village of Nazeing, has culminated in a significant legal defeat for the trio.
A Dispute Over Privacy and Property Lines
Robert McCarthy, 59, a civil construction manager, and his wife Amanda, 61, a carer, purchased their home on Common View, Bumbles Green, in Nazeing back in 2001. For years, they lived in "relative harmony" with their neighbours to the rear: Foulla Bowler, 61, and her two siblings, John Barberis, 63, and Mary Englishby, 59, who jointly own the property known as Kormakitis.
The McCarthys' garden featured an "immaculate, very pleasant" space, bordered by a fence with a row of mature Leylandii trees on their side, providing a vital privacy screen. However, this peaceful coexistence shattered in 2018 when a dispute over the exact boundary line ignited what Judge Alan Saggerson later termed "fence wars."
Unilateral Action and Alleged Invasion
The siblings contended that the true boundary extended several feet beyond the existing fence, placing the Leylandii trees on their land. Acting on this belief, they took unilateral action. Despite the ongoing dispute and an application for tree felling permission in 2018, the family proceeded with their plan.
In a series of confrontational moves:
- They began removing the fence in May 2018.
- Plants were pulled up despite objections from Mr. McCarthy.
- Replacement fences erected by the McCarthys were repeatedly removed by the siblings in 2019 and 2020.
- Tree surgeons were instructed, culminating in the majority of the trees being felled in January 2022.
Mr. McCarthy described the events as an "invasion" and a "relentless destruction of my garden," stating from the witness box, "I can stand upstairs in my house and they can see me walking around. I want my privacy back like I had." The McCarthys' barrister, Christopher Coyle, noted that the felling continued into a second day even after a lawyer's letter requested it stop.
Court Ruling Favours Homeowners
Following a trial at Central London County Court last October, Judge Saggerson delivered a judgment made public last week. He found the evidence of the siblings "less reliable and less accurate" than that of the McCarthys, though he did not accuse them of lying, instead suggesting they had "persuaded themselves of the righteousness of their own case."
The judge rejected the claim that their father, Elias Barberis, was told the boundary extended beyond the fence when purchasing the property in 1981. He determined that the original chain-link fence line, present since at least 1975, represented the true boundary. Consequently, the Leylandii trees were unequivocally within the McCarthys' property.
"It was the defendants' unilateral action from May 2018 that disrupted what had been settled for decades," Judge Saggerson stated. "Due to the defendants' unilateral action, the landscape along the disputed boundary has completely changed from that which existed before May 2018." He ruled that the McCarthys' claims for trespass were established on the balance of probabilities.
Financial Fallout and Future Hearing
The ruling has severe financial implications for Mrs. Bowler and her siblings. They are now likely liable for:
- The McCarthys' legal costs, estimated at £130,000.
- Their own substantial court costs.
- Potential compensation of up to £115,000 sought by the McCarthys, which includes around £73,500 for replanting trees and restoring privacy.
Judge Saggerson characterised the situation as a "protracted and potentially ruinous boundary dispute between neighbours." The exact total, which could approach a quarter of a million pounds, will be determined at a further hearing scheduled for the summer. This hearing will finalise the compensation due and the full costs of the case, bringing a costly and acrimonious neighbourhood conflict closer to its conclusion.
