The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruled on a neighborhood dispute over cross-border tree branches.
Climate change or CO2 reduction, the tree in the neighbor’s garden is a bone of contention. The courts regularly deal with falling leaves, cross-border roots and overhanging branches and now the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in Karlsruhe, the highest authority in neighborhood disputes. The current verdict: Overhanging branches must be removed, even if it endangers the stability of the tree. However, there is a but, but in order:
In Berlin, Pankow / Weißensee district, a black pine has been growing on a plot of land for 40 years. Today it is 15 meters high and its branches have long protruded into the neighbour’s property. He no longer wanted to accept this and asked for it to be cut back, which the owner refused. Then the neighbor took to self-help, more precisely to the pruning shears, and cut off the wild growth. This in turn prompted the tree owner to file an action for an injunction that the stability of the pine was endangered. So the case took its course through all court instances.
The verdict on Friday: The branches have to go, the neighbor can, if necessary, resort to self-help. And what about the stability of the tree? This does not change anything in terms of the claim to pruning. Because, according to the BGH, the owner is responsible for tree care. If he has allowed the branches to expand over years to the neighboring property, he cannot invoke the threat to stability if the pruning is radical.
But now comes the but: nature conservation. If the municipal building regulations prohibit pruning and there is no special permit, the neighbor cannot request that the branches be removed. The specific case is now going back to the Berlin Regional Court, which has to clarify what the Berlin building regulations provide. Since there are tree orders everywhere, it will depend on these up and down the country when there is an argument about hanging branches. (AZ: V ZR 234/19)
It is the fourth construction judgment of the BGH. Basically: Anyone who plants a tree must keep the distance to the neighboring border, usually two meters. If this is the case, neighbors can neither demand the felling of the tree nor money for the removal of fallen leaves, according to the BGH two years ago (V ZR 102/18). If the distance is not reached, the tree can be requested to be felled (V ZR 8/17). But the BGH set the limitation period to three years. After that, the right to have the tree removed lapses (V ZR 136/18).
Overgrown roots and branches never have to tolerate neighbors inside, whether the distance has been kept or not. An exception applies, see above, if the urban building code prohibits the removal.
Cities are currently working on concepts against climate change and heat waves. The increase in the tree population and sponsorships for trees are a supporting pillar. Those involved are well advised to review the regulations in force before the dispute over the tree escalates.
