Hamilton v Weston [1997]

The claimant complained that his neighbour had trimmed a row of trees that the claimant had planted close to the fence marking the boundary between their properties. He claimed damages for trespass, but the neighbour asserted that he had been entitled to cut down the trees.
In the small claims court, the district judge found that the trees were growing on the neighbour’s land, so there had been no trespass. The claimant made an application to set the order aside, but it was refused.

In the meantime, the neighbour had felled ten of the trees and the claimant began a new action in the County Court. The statement of claim was worded so as not to make any claim with respect to the trees.
The district judge declared that the boundary showed the trees to be on the claimant’s land, and awarded him damages for trespass against the neighbour. The neighbour’s appeal against this was dismissed.

The claimant then issued fresh proceedings in the County Court, claiming £5, 000 damages. The claim was struck out, as the judge held that the decision of the small claims court that the neighbour had not committed trespass had been final and prevented the claimant from disputing the neighbour’s right to fell the trees.

HELD: The Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant’s appeal against the third decision. The claimant could not argued that the decision of the small claims court was inferior to the later decision of the County Court.

Citation: Hamilton v Weston [1997] E.G. 10 (CS)