Regina v Alath Construction Ltd: CACD 1990

The defendant company was accused of felling a tree in breach of a tree preservation order. Recorder Zucker QC had ruled held that the prosecution did not have to prove that the tree in question was not dying, or dead or dangerous or creating a nuisance. It was for the defendant to establish one or other of the exemptions in section 60(6) in order to establish a defence to the charge.
Held: The ruling was correct. It was for the prosecution to prove, among other things, that the defendant had felled the tree without the permission of the local authority. The appeal failed.


Recorder Zucker QC


[1990] 1 WLR 1255


Town and Country Planning Act 1971 60(6)


England and Wales


CitedRegina v Hunt (Richard) HL 1987
The court objected to the insistence on leaving the burden throughout a prosecution on the defendant on the ground that ‘the discharge of an evidential burden proves nothing – it merely raises an issue’. The House emphasised the special nature of . .
CitedRegina v Edwards 1975
On a charge of selling intoxicating liquor without a justices’ licence, it is not for the prosecutor to prove that the defendant had no licence but for the defendant to prove that he had. The burden of establishing a statutory exemption by way of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.542702