Humanities desk
< January 28	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 30 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 29

Tree hanging over a neighbour's fence

I think it's the law in many places that if a tree that's planted on your property has branches that extend beyond your fenceline and into your neighbour's property, then what they do about those parts of the branches beyond the fenceline is entirely a matter for them. Effectively, those parts of the hanging branches are your neighbour's property, not yours.

Is it correct to also say that if I wish to prune my tree, I am prohibited from pruning any parts that hang over the neighbour's fence unless I have their permission? What if I wish to chop my tree down, but the neighbour has become attached to the overhanging branches and doesn't want them removed? (I'm reminded of Shylock's dilemma, where he was permitted to take his pound of flesh but not to spill a single drop of blood.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have had reason to investigate this in a UK context. In UK law, it is indeed the case that one can cut off a branch (or trim a hedge, etc.) extending into one's property at any point up to the boundary line. One should however dispose of it as one would with one's own garden waste, not throw it back into the property from which the tree (etc.) is growing (as has happened to me). Additionally, if the branch is bearing fruit, one should offer to return the fruit to the tree's owner.

It is not the case that if one's own tree branch extends into a neighbor's property, one cannot prune or remove the tree without their permission. However, one would need their permission to enter their property in order to do so, if that were necessary.

Of course, (i) IANAL, and (ii) Australian law may differ. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.103.187 (talk) 07:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that we're not supposed to give legal advice here. Alansplodge (talk) 11:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK there are things called tree preservation orders. I don't know about elsewhere. If such an order were in existance you would need to seek legal help from elsewhere. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That makes a lot of sense, 90.205. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry to hear that your neighbour has become attached to the overhanging branches. Perhaps if you threw him a rope.... ? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tee hee. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This from the Victorian government suggests that unlike in the UK (as per the IP), branches and leaves should be returned to the tree owner as they remain their property, unless there's an agreement otherwise. [1]

I assume most neigbour's would be happy for you to keep the branches and leaves, and in any case, I quite doubt just throwing them over is what you should do especially since there may be risks from doing so. Instead if they did ask for them back, I assume your take them over via some agreed access route. (I mean if they tell you to just throw them over then that would be fine.)

The reason you're allowed to prune branches up to the property line is because of right of abatement [2] not because they became your property.

While it doesn't definitely say you don't need permission to prune trees on your property which overhang onto a neighbours, it strongly suggests it since it talks about overhanging branches from the non owner's PoV, but then just says owners can do generally whatever you want with trees on their property unless they are protected by an environmental overlay.

There are stuff I found which suggests it might be the same in NSW but I'm reluctant to give these in a question like as they are commercial sites and this answer is IMO already on the borderline of legal advice.

Nil Einne (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For clarity, while I didn't see this specifically answered, I assume if neither of you want the branches then the person who cut the tree is the one responsible for dealing with them, just like they're responsible for the costs of cutting it. It sounds like this is actually the same in the UK [3] Nil Einne (talk) 00:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) One more point, I know in NZ, and it sounds like it's also the case in at least some parts of Victoria [4] [5], someone including a neighbour could nominate a tree to be protected. And if a tree is protected, it would limit what the property owner can do. However by itself the fact branches overhang someone else's property is unlikely to make it more likely it will be protected. It may even make it less likely, although not sure on this. I'm not sure if being an immediate neigbour as opposed to someone else who at least lives in the neighbourhood will even be relevant. (Possibly even living nearby won't be significant.) Nil Einne (talk) 03:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For a significant international incident triggered by tree-trimming, see Korean axe murder incident... AnonMoos (talk) 03:45, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not too poplar, were they... Martinevans123 (talk) 09:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Over-zealous tree pruning can be problematic. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, so can under-zealous tree pruning. --142.112.220.136 (talk) 06:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]