Millionaire wins court fight after developers cut hedge while he was on holiday

A multi-millionaire who came home from holiday to find developers had hacked down trees and hedges, ruining the countryside views from his lavish 10-acre home, has won a High Court fight.

Lee Bootle, 54, said he was shocked when his housekeeper informed him builders working on a £100 million business park next-door had ripped up greenery along a 120-metre stretch of his land.

The damage left the auto repair king and his family staring at the nearby A674 from the windows of their high-end detached five-bed home in Whittle-le-Woods, near Chorley, Lancashire.

While no damages can be paid for his loss of privacy, a High Court judge agreed the developers had committed ‘substantial acts of trespass’ resulting in the removal of ‘a substantial number of trees and bushes’ being removed from Mr Bootle’s side of the boundary.

Mr Bootle is claiming damages running into several hundred thousand pounds, with the case set to return to court later for a ruling on exactly how much he will receive.

However, he will also be liable to pay some compensation to the developers for about three weeks of lost work time on the development while the case was ongoing last year.

A further hearing will take place to decide the amounts in damages due, as well as who pays the substantial costs of the case.

The court heard Mr Bootle, who runs the multi-million-pound James Group auto repair company, bought Little Knowley Farm, comprising a farm house with outbuildings and 10 acres of adjoining farmland, in 2007.

He then obtained planning permission, demolishing the existing house and building a sumptuous five-bed family home, surrounded by landscaped walled gardens, for him, his wife Rebecca and three children.

The adjoining land was bought by developers GHL Property Management and Development Ltd in 2018, which after initially planning a 233-home site, obtained permission for a £100m development for commercial, industrial, storage and distribution use, with related company, FI Real Estate Management Ltd, doing the work.

Part of the development land and Mr Bootle’s property were separated by a ditch and brook outside of the walls of his garden, with bushes, trees and fences on both sides of the watercourse.

‘In anticipation of planning permission, GHL or its contractors commenced clearance work on 29 April 2024 or thereabouts,’ the judge outlined in his judgment.

‘This happened when Mr Bootle was away on business. However, on his return the following day, Mr Bootle advised workmen on site that they had cut down and removed trees on his land.

‘He advised them that the boundary was the fence and hedge to the south of the brook, not the palisade fence on his land to the north.’

In his evidence, Mr Bootle said that, after further trees were chopped down, he arranged a meeting with representatives of the developers who accepted that trees had been cut down and that no further work on his side of the boundary was necessary.

He then went off on holiday, touring Spain’s Balearic Islands by yacht with his family.

But Mr Bootle’s housekeeper gave evidence to the court of her ‘disquiet’ when she had to call him while he was away after realising more greenery had been ripped out and that the previously screened house was now visible from the busy A674 Millennium Way.

The case went to court with Mr Bootle claiming in his evidence that the boundary between the two plots of land was the brook and ditch.

He claimed that, in doing work on the north side of the brook, the developers had strayed onto his land and hacked away mature trees belonging to him.

Giving judgment, Judge Mark Halliwell found that the true boundary is to the north side of the brook and that the ditch and watercourse are on the developers’ land.

But in doing their work, they had repeatedly crossed over the boundary and onto Mr Bootle’s land, removing substantial amounts of bush and trees belonging to him, he found.

‘The established boundary is north of the ditch and, from Mr Bootle’s perspective, it falls short of the position he has sought to advance in these proceedings,’ he said.

‘To the extent that the defendants have carried out works flattening land to the south of the ditch, building an embankment and culverting parts of the ditch itself, they have not encroached on Little Knowley Farm.

‘However, during the course of their works, the defendants have repeatedly entered Little Knowley Farm without Mr Bootle’s consent and committed acts of trespass on his property.

‘This includes removing substantial amounts of the vegetation and cutting down bushes and trees north of the boundary. Such works commenced in late April 2024. There were further acts of trespass in June, July and August 2024.

‘The defendants’ acts of trespass involved removing vegetation from Little Knowley Farm for the full length of the established boundary.

‘It is likely to have included a substantial number of trees and bushes – significantly more than three trees – liberally spread north of the established boundary.

‘Mr Bootle is prima facie entitled to damages for the recovery of his attendant losses and, in the absence of agreement, his losses will have to be assessed at a further hearing.’

Of Mr Bootle’s housekeeper’s account of the house now being visible from the nearby Millennium Way, the judge said he had visited the site and found the house was visible from the road.

Mr Bootle’s house had been built to take advantage of views to the south and west – in the direction of the A-road and the development land – and it had previously been screened by trees.

But the judge said damages could not be awarded for the loss of that screening.

Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at [email protected].

For more stories like this, check our news page.

MORE: Full list of Ryanair routes being axed across Europe in 2025

MORE: Luigi Mangione wears bulletproof vest in first court appearance since arraignment

MORE: Brit tourist found dead in hotel room in popular beach resort