SHARE
COPY LINK

OFFBEAT

It’s legal to trim your neighbour’s tree (even if he doesn’t want you to), Germany’s highest court rules

The Federal High Court (BGH) is used to dealing with some of the most high-profile crimes in the country. But on Friday it announced its ruling on a rather different deliberation - whether it is permissible to trim branches hanging over into one's garden.

It’s legal to trim your neighbour's tree (even if he doesn't want you to), Germany’s highest court rules
A spruce tree. credit: dpa-tmn | Andrea Warnecke

In recent weeks the BGH has confirmed rulings against far-right terrorists, police killers and murderous businessmen. 

So the judges were no doubt happy for a bit of light relief when they were asked to deliberate a slightly less gruesome issue – whether the law allows one to cut back the branches of a neighbours tree that have grown over the fence.

This seemingly inconsequential matter of law made it all the way up to the highest court after a Berlin judge ruled in favour of the tree’s owner.

A Berlin man whose spruce tree had spread its branches into the neighbours garden filed a complaint when he saw that his neighbour had cut back the branches in his side of the fence.

The tree owner said that the action could have destabilized his tree and made it more vulnerable to being blown over by a storm. He even insisted that the pruning of its branches could lead the tree to die.

But on Friday the BGH ruled in favour of the tree pruner, saying he had a right to self-help which was provided for in the German Civil Code.

The judges emphasized that the right to self-help could be restricted by nature conservation regulations, such as tree protection statutes, but that these did not apply in this case.

SEE ALSO: The story of Germany’s oldest national park as it turns 50

Member comments

  1. Yet another example of bad neighbourliness leading to legal action, which in the end will probably cause the tree to suffer as a result of unneccessary or unstructured work. Consequently, so will many more trees suffer, as this will set a bad legal precedent if not moderated correctly by law. As an arborist, I see examples like this all the time, everyone claims to care about their trees but they care about their property and legal rights (i.e. being in the right), far far more. Whether the tree suffers or is destabilised, or not, will depend upon the species, age and location of the tree. A far better solution is to agree between neighbours what should be done and who will pay (usually split between both). Sadly far too many prefer to call the police on their neighbour and wait to be completely vindicated, yet the consequences are usually far worse for nature. The result, a lot of antiseptic, nature-free gardens with rigid legal and natural borders that do no good for nature at all. The price of being in the right.

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

OFFBEAT

Is Switzerland’s male-only mandatory military service ‘discriminatory’?

Under Swiss law, all men must serve at least one year in compulsory national service. But is this discriminatory?

Swiss military members walk across a road carrying guns
A new lawsuit seeks to challenge Switzerland's male-only military service requirement. Is this discriminatory? FABRICE COFFRINI / AFP

All men aged between the ages of 18 and 30 are required to complete compulsory military service in Switzerland. 

A lawsuit which worked its way through the Swiss courts has now ended up in the European Court of Human Rights, where the judges will decide if Switzerland’s male-only conscription requirement violates anti-discrimination rules. 

Switzerland’s NZZ newspaper wrote on Monday the case has “explosive potential” and has “what it takes to cause a tremor” to a policy which was first laid out in Switzerland’s 1848 and 1874 Federal Constitutions. 

What is Switzerland’s compulsory military service? 

Article 59 of the Federal Constitution of Switzerland says “Every man with Swiss citizenship is liable for military service. Alternative civilian service shall be provided for by law.”

Recruits must generally do 18 weeks of boot camp (longer in some cases). 

They are then required to spend several weeks in the army every year until they have completed a minimum 245 days of service.

Military service is compulsory for Swiss men aged 18 and over. Women can chose to do military service but this is rare.

What about national rather than military service? 

Introduced in 1996, this is an alternative to the army, originally intended for those who objected to military service on moral grounds. 

READ MORE: The Swiss army’s growing problem with civilian service

Service is longer there than in the army, from the age of 20 to 40. 

This must be for 340 days in total, longer than the military service requirement. 

What about foreigners and dual nationals? 

Once you become a Swiss citizen and are between the ages of 18 and 30, you can expect to be conscripted. 

READ MORE: Do naturalised Swiss citizens have to do military service?

In general, having another citizenship in addition to the Swiss one is not going to exempt you from military service in Switzerland.

However, there is one exception: the obligation to serve will be waved, provided you can show that you have fulfilled your military duties in your other home country.

If you are a Swiss (naturalised or not) who lives abroad, you are not required to serve in the military in Switzerland, though you can voluntarily enlist. 

How do Swiss people feel about military and national service? 

Generally, the obligation is viewed relatively positively, both by the general public and by those who take part in compulsory service. 

While several other European countries have gotten rid of mandatory service, a 2013 referendum which attempted to abolish conscription was rejected by 73 percent of Swiss voters. 

What is the court case and what does it say? 

Martin D. Küng, the lawyer from the Swiss canton of Bern who has driven the case through the courts, has a personal interest in its success. 

He was found unfit for service but is still required to pay an annual bill to the Swiss government, which was 1662CHF for the last year he was required to pay it. 

While the 36-year-old no longer has to pay the amount – the obligation only lasts between the ages of 18 and 30 – Küng is bring the case on principle. 

So far, Küng has had little success in the Swiss courts, with his appeal rejected by the cantonal administrative court and later by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. 

Previous Supreme Court cases, when hearing objections to men-only military service, said that women are less suitable for conscription due to “physiological and biological differences”.

In Küng’s case, the judges avoided this justification, saying instead that the matter was a constitutional issue. 

‘No objective reason why only men have to do military service’

He has now appealed the decision to the European level. 

While men have previously tried and failed when taking their case to the Supreme Court, no Swiss man has ever brought the matter to the European Court of Human Rights. 

Küng told the NZZ that he considered the rule to be unjust and said the Supreme Court’s decision is based on political considerations. 

“I would have expected the Federal Supreme Court to have the courage to clearly state the obvious in my case and not to decide on political grounds,” Küng said. 

“There is no objective reason why only men have to do military service or pay replacement taxes. On average, women may not be as physically productive as men, but that is not a criterion for excluding them from compulsory military service. 

There are quite a few men who cannot keep up with women in terms of stamina. Gender is simply the wrong demarcation criterion for deciding on compulsory service. If so, then one would have to focus on physical performance.”

Is it likely to pass? 

Küng is optimistic that the Strasbourg court will find in his favour, pointing to a successful appeal by a German man who complained about a fire brigade tax, which was only imposed on men. 

“This question has not yet been conclusively answered by the court” Küng said. 

The impact of a decision in his favour could be considerable, with European law technically taking precedence over Swiss law.

It would set Switzerland on a collision course with the bloc, particularly given the popularity of the conscription provision. 

Küng clarified that political outcomes and repercussions don’t concern him. 

“My only concern is for a court to determine that the current regulation is legally wrong.”

SHOW COMMENTS