A town battle over a ‘diseased’ 170-year-old oak tree now has a council pleading for permission to chop it down – while campaigners celebrate a new High Court ruling. 

A fierce dispute over the fate of the so-called ‘Old King George’ tree continues to rage in Wivenhoe, Essex, with new calls for it to be hauled down immediately or risk damaging nearby residents’ homes.

Yet activists against the proposed axeing of the tree have won permission to pursue a judicial review opposing Wivenhoe Town Council’s proposals which are backed by insurance firm Aviva.

Locals last year chained themselves to the ‘majestic’ oak which dates back to the Victorian era in 7,600-population Wivenhoe, defying attempts so far to get rid of it and another tree nearby.

The oak has been threatened with being toppled, after complaints by neighbours that its underground roots cause subsidence damage to their homes – and Aviva has said the tree needs cutting down as a result. 

The felling was put on hold last February on the promise of further investigations.

A ‘Stop The Chop’ campaign has been led by 32-year-old architect and sustainability specialist Kat Scott, who told the Daily Mail today how the judicial review decision was giving the group ‘greater confidence in moving forward’.

Wivenhoe Town Council has announced its faith in two confidential reports drawn up on behalf of the local authority and insurers Aviva – and previously insisted the tree must be chopped down by this month.

Campaigners last year chained themselves to a ‘majestic’ oak which dates back to the Victorian era in 7,600-population Wivenhoe, Essex

Architect and sustainability specialist Kat Scott has been leading the campaign to save the oak

That has been put on hold by the latest developments, however, despite the town council saying new analysis of the tree’s Acute Oak Decline disease spreading. 

A nearby horse chestnut tree at the same car park in the Essex town, bordering a row of Victorian homes built beside a railway track, is also under threat. 

Activists against the move say they have been kept in the dark over just how many homes might be affected, and how.

They took to the street outside Aviva’s London HQ with a noisy protest last December, bearing loudhailers and protest placards while demanding the insurance giant goes public with its evidence for pulling down the trees.

The campaign group received High Court papers on Monday confirming permission for their judicial review application to go ahead, to be examined at a full hearing. 

Activists have been challenging the council’s decision the trees should be felled while also wanting more information on analysis carried out and potential alternatives. 

The town council said in a statement this week it wanted the existing injunction lifted after car park resurfacing work indicated signs of Acute Oak Decline in the tree.

WIvenhoe Town Council said: ‘AOD is known to be prevalent in North Essex and sadly once infected there is no current way to combat the disease.

‘It is therefore the opinion of both the arboreal expert and Colchester City Council’s arboreal officer that whilst the future structural condition of the tree cannot be predicted with certainty, the lifespan of the oak tree in the car park now has a reduced life expectancy. Tree death could result within three to five years.

‘WTC, along with every Council in the country, received a letter this month from DEFRA to make it clear we need to take action should we have any trees under our control which may pose a risk to the life of residents and visitors, in the light of several tragic deaths of adults and children from falling branches in the past year.

‘In light of this recent development, we are corresponding with the solicitor acting for the tree protest group requesting that they set aside the Injunction given the potential risk of harm the oak now poses to visitors and property within its vicinity.’

But as a result of the High Court ruling that a judicial review process can be pursued further, the local authority has been told to file a detailed response within 35 days – with the campaign group then given another 21 days to respond. 

The campaigners, who say they will ‘co-operate fully with both the council and the court’, are carrying out fundraising aimed at a CrowdJustice target of £20,000 to cover legal costs.

Richard Buxton, of Richard Buxton Solicitors, added: ‘Just as we have a duty to consider the merits of our claim, so does Wivenhoe Town Council, especially as permission for a judicial review has now been granted.

‘Given the fact that they have offered no defence at all they should responsibly concede.’ 

Ms Scott said: ‘We and many residents of Wivenhoe would like the situation resolved as soon as possible.

Some fear the tree’s roots are undermining the foundation of nearby homes (pictured)

‘The confirmation of a court timetable provides a clear pathway to an independent determination of the issues surrounding the trees.

‘We have every sympathy for the affected property owners and hope the legal process helps bring clarity for all concerned.’

She told the Daily Mail: ‘There’s quite a lot going on – we have the important judicial review given permission to proceed, a big moment.

‘It gives us greater confidence in moving forwards, towards a full hearing.

‘On the other hand, the council are wanting to lift the injunction and go ahead with felling the tree now they say it’s in decline. We’re fighting on two fronts.

‘I imagine now it will be a matter of months not weeks. But we don’t want to win an academic victory in court at a later date if the tree is no longer there.’

Ms Scott – who launched a petition to save the trees which has more than 5,000 signatures – has told how she was concerned for her two-year-old daughter who is a keen user of a nearby play area.

A temporary agreement was reached last February over the King George Oak tree in Wivenhoe

She previously told the Daily Mail: ‘I take her to the park, appreciating the shade of the oak tree. I would be very guilty if not helping to keep it – and sad if next summer the tree’s not there.’

Campaigners also say the oak and horse chestnut provide ‘significant environmental and community benefits’, such as supporting local biodiversity and cooling the playground by up to 6C to 8C in summer.

The so-called ‘King George Oak’ was initially believed to be 150 years old, before campaigners brought in experts who estimated it dates back as far as 170 years.

Wivenhoe Town Council said in a statement today: ‘Our legal representatives have been notified of the court’s ruling to proceed to a hearing on the judicial review but this comes as no surprise.

‘Following the interim injunction the court was always going to order directions toward a final hearing.

‘Our legal representatives have been in touch with those acting for the protest group in the past week to provide a report which highlights the concerns over the oak tree’s infection with Acute Oak Decline (AOD), and the impact on its life expectancy.

‘We have asked for a response by the end of this week and dependent on that response we will discuss with our legal representatives on the next steps to bring this situation to a swift conclusion.

‘It remains our belief, based on the extensive evidence available to us, that the removal of the oak and horse chestnut trees is required and we are confident that should the evidence be laid before the court that belief will be supported.

‘We maintain that a lengthy and expensive court process only exacerbates the issue and given the process is now into its fourth year the ongoing distress of those homeowners affected needs to be recognised.’ 

An independent report commissioned by the campaigners, costing £20,000 raised through a crowdfunding drive, reported earlier this year.

It suggested multiple potential causes of ground movement – including drainage issues, railway vibrations, shallow foundations and ground conditions.

Two separate reports upon which the town council based its view remain confidential.

The town council has pointed to reports blaming the tree for subsidence damage to local homes.

It also insisted further delays to taking it down could leave the authority ‘facing a financial liability at a level way beyond’ its cash reserves.

The three demands made as part of the protest outside Aviva HQ include releasing the full technical evidence for the subsidence claim.

The others are ‘engaging directly with the community and independent experts in a meaningful manner’ and exploring alternative approaches instead of felling the trees as a first option.

Responding to the protest outside its HQ in December, Aviva said: ‘This is a complex and sensitive matter which we are keen to resolve in the best way for all the parties involved.

‘Whilst we are unable to share specific details due to policy and customer confidentiality, we would like to reassure you that we are working hard to provide the most suitable solution.’