…I think that I shall never see.. a poem lovely as a tree…
A judge apparently didn’t agree.. using more than 12000 words to define.. tree.
Justice Cranston was forced by law to actually spell out what was a legal definition when he was ruling on a case that surrounded a preservation order for trees, because he said, there was some confusion in the planning and no “statutory definition of a tree”.
The High Court judge ruled that size does not matter and that the smallest sapling is still legally a tree, reports The Daily Telegraph.
His ruling however didn’t agree with an earlier one that clashed with Lord Denning, a former Master of the Rolls, who stated in his ruling that a tree was only a tree if its trunk had a diameter of at least seven inches.
Man I hope we’re not paying them by the hour…