Skip to content 
Japanese Knotweed Case Law
Japanese knotweed (Reynoutria japonica) is one of the most invasive plant species in the UK, capable of spreading rapidly and causing damage to structures, boundary walls and underground services.
But beyond the physical problems it creates, knotweed has become a significant legal issue – particularly when it spreads from one property to another. Over the last decade, a series of court cases and investigations have defined the responsibilities of landowners, including large organisations such as Network Rail, and clarified what constitutes an actionable nuisance in law.
Key cases and investigations
Meet our expert
At Environet, all of our content is written and fact-checked by experienced experts.
Emily Grant
Quick Links
Davies v Bridgend County Borough Council
Timeline of the case
2020
The claimant, Mr Davies, issued proceedings against Bridgend County Borough Council. He alleged private nuisance arising from Japanese knotweed encroaching from council-owned land onto his property at Dinam Street, Nant-y-Moel. The claim sought damages for residual diminution in value (about £4,900) due to the stigma of knotweed even after treatment.
2022 – County Court decision
At first instance, the court found that although the council had allowed knotweed to encroach and there was a continuing nuisance, the claimed loss was pure economic loss and therefore not recoverable. The court held that the physical interference pre-dated any actionable breach and that the remaining loss was only financial.
2023 – Court of Appeal judgment ([2023] EWCA Civ 80)
The Court of Appeal overturned the lower decision. It ruled that where knotweed rhizomes have encroached onto neighbouring land, the landowner may recover damages for residual diminution in value, as this stems from physical interference, not pure economic loss. The case was remitted for assessment of damages.
2024 – supreme court judgment ([2024] UKSC 15)
On 8 May 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously allowed the council’s appeal. The court agreed there had been a continuing nuisance between 2013 and 2018 but held that the claimant failed to prove factual causation. The residual diminution in value had already occurred before the council’s breach of duty arose. As a result, no damages were awarded. The Supreme Court confirmed that residual diminution claims may be recoverable in principle but only if the loss is caused by the defendant’s breach after the duty to act arises.
Why is this case significant?
In Davies v Bridgend, the knotweed was shown to have spread from council-owned land onto Mr Davies’s property before he bought it in 2004. The council later became aware of the infestation, but only began active treatment around 2018. The courts accepted that from about 2013 the council either knew or ought to have known of the risk posed by knotweed, creating a duty to take reasonable steps to control it.
The case is now a leading authority on two points:
- the distinction between recoverable loss caused by physical encroachment and non-recoverable pure economic loss, and
- the need to establish factual causation , showing that the loss arose because of the defendant’s breach, not simply because knotweed was present.
It serves as a major reference for property owners and councils dealing with Japanese knotweed claims, clarifying that while nuisance liability can arise from encroachment, damages for property stigma depend on when and how the defendant’s duty to act arose.
The landmark Network Rail v Williams & Waistell judgment (2018)
On 3rd July 2018, the Court of Appeal handed down a landmark judgment in Network Rail Infrastructure v Williams & Waistell – a decision that would change how knotweed nuisance cases are handled across the UK.
The case began when two neighbouring property owners in South Wales brought claims against Network Rail due to the presence of Japanese knotweed on its adjoining land. The claimants argued that the infestation interfered with the use and enjoyment of their properties and had significantly reduced their market value.
At the original hearing in February 2017, Recorder Grubb, sitting at Cardiff County Court, awarded the claimants damages for the cost of treatment and the residual diminution in value of their homes. Network Rail appealed the decision on two main grounds:
- that the mere presence of knotweed on its railway embankment could not constitute an actionable nuisance; and
- that even if there was encroachment, there was no causal link between the alleged breach and the losses suffered.
The claimants cross-appealed, arguing that Recorder Grubb had taken too narrow a view of what constituted physical damage.
The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed Network Rail’s appeal and upheld the claimants’ rights, although on slightly different legal reasoning. The Master of the Rolls delivered the lead judgment, finding that while the mere presence of knotweed on neighbouring land was not automatically a nuisance, encroachment from one property to another did constitute an actionable interference. The court ruled that once encroachment occurs, this “will automatically amount to physical damage and an actionable nuisance” for which the affected landowner can claim damages covering both treatment costs and the loss of property value.
As the judgment stated: “It is imperative that the landowner takes steps to eradicate the knotweed.”
This case set a powerful precedent. It confirmed that once Japanese knotweed has encroached onto a neighbouring property, the landowner from whose land it spread is liable for both the cost of eradication and diminution in value. It also means that landowners who ignore infestations or fail to take reasonable action can now be held accountable in law.
The implications are significant. As the judgment observed: “It is now far easier for individuals to bring claims against neighbouring landowners.”
For homeowners, the case provided long-awaited legal clarity. For large landowners, including public bodies and housing associations, it imposed a clear duty of care: monitor, treat and control knotweed before it spreads. Failure to do so could lead to injunctions, damages and costly litigation.
The Times investigation: Network Rail’s continuing failures
While Network Rail has since taken steps to improve its knotweed management, problems have persisted. In a 2019 investigation, The Times revealed that Network Rail had received 11,000 complaints about Japanese knotweed since 2011, including more than 6,000 cases where the plant was reported to be spreading onto private property. The number of complaints had risen by 70% between 2012 and 2018.
The investigation exposed how thousands of homeowners living near railway lines remained trapped, unable to sell their homes because infestations on Network Rail land had not been properly treated – or because treatments were carried out without providing the insurance-backed guarantees (IBGs) demanded by mortgage lenders.
Environet’s Managing Director Nic Seal contributed to the investigation, explaining one of the key issues: that even when Network Rail carries out herbicide treatments, it does not provide homeowners with a formal guarantee for the work. This means that when a property has been affected by knotweed, it remains extremely difficult to sell unless a valid IBG is in place.
As Nic Seal told The Times: “Simply treating infestations with herbicide where homes are under threat is not enough. Network Rail must face up to its responsibilities and take action now to remedy the situation by swallowing the cost of offering guarantees to homeowners for treatment work.”
Nic’s comments were later picked up by the mortgage press, including Mortgage Introducer and Mortgage Solutions, helping to raise awareness of the continuing impact of knotweed on property transactions.
Japanese knotweed and the law: What property owners need to know
These cases collectively established the foundation of modern knotweed case law in the UK. Today, the legal position can be summarised as follows:
- It is not an offence to have Japanese knotweed on your land, as stated by the Environment Agency’s Code of Practice.
- However, allowing knotweed to encroach onto a neighbouring property constitutes an actionable nuisance once the roots or shoots cross the boundary.
- When encroachment occurs, it is considered physical damage, and the affected property owner is entitled to claim damages for both the cost of treatment and any diminution in property value.
- Landowners have a duty of care to take reasonable steps to prevent the spread of knotweed, particularly where there is an imminent risk of encroachment.
- Failing to act can result in injunctions, damages awards, and legal costs that can reach tens of thousands of pounds.
The courts have made it clear: taking proactive steps – such as instructing a professional, accredited knotweed removal company like Environet – is the most effective way for landowners to demonstrate that they have acted reasonably. Using an accredited contractor also ensures that treatment work is backed by an insurance-backed guarantee, protecting the property’s value and satisfying mortgage lender requirements.
Prevention, responsibility and the path forward
The Network Rail cases have reshaped the legal landscape surrounding Japanese knotweed, transforming what was once a grey area of property law into a clear framework of rights and responsibilities. They underline the importance of early intervention, professional treatment, and transparency in property transactions.
For homeowners, the message is clear: if knotweed encroaches onto your property, you have legal recourse to claim compensation for treatment and any loss in value. For landowners and organisations, the responsibility is equally clear: take immediate action to control knotweed or risk costly legal consequences.
As these rulings and investigations show, ignoring knotweed is no longer an option. The law now recognises its potential to cause both physical and financial harm – and those affected have a right to seek redress.
If you’re dealing with Japanese knotweed on your property or concerned about encroachment from neighbouring land, contact Environet today. Our expert team can survey, identify, and remove infestations, providing insurance-backed guarantees recognised by mortgage lenders.
Japanese knotweed case law FAQs
No, it is not illegal to have Japanese knotweed on your land. However, you must prevent it from spreading onto neighbouring land or into the wild. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, it is an offence to “plant or otherwise cause Japanese knotweed to grow in the wild.” In addition, civil law considers it an actionable nuisance if knotweed encroaches onto another person’s property. This means you could face a claim for damages or be forced by court injunction to remove it.
If Japanese knotweed crosses a boundary, it is legally classed as encroachment and automatically constitutes an actionable nuisance following the landmark Network Rail v Williams & Waistell (2018) Court of Appeal judgment. The affected property owner is entitled to claim compensation for the cost of treatment and any diminution in property value caused by the infestation. Landowners who ignore infestations or fail to take reasonable steps to control them, risk being held liable for substantial damages.
Yes. If a neighbour, public body or business allows Japanese knotweed to spread onto your property, you can pursue a private nuisance claim. Successful cases, such as those against Network Rail, have established that affected homeowners can recover the cost of professional treatment and the reduction in market value caused by the knotweed. Before taking legal action, it’s advisable to obtain an expert survey and written report from a reputable contractor such as Environet, which can be used as supporting evidence.
Start fixing your invasive plant problem today by requesting a survey
Request a survey
Rest assured, where invasive species are identified at an early stage and tackled correctly, problems can usually be avoided. Our specialist consultants complete thorough surveys to identify the extent of the problem. Our plans aren’t one-size-fits-all; they’re customised to tackle the invasive species at your property effectively, taking account of all of your requirements.
GET IN TOUCH
Contact us
Our team of experts is available between 9am and 5:30pm, Monday to Friday to answer your enquiries and advise you on the next steps
Want a survey?
If you already know you have an invasive plant problem, you can request a survey online in less than two minutes by providing a few brief details. A member of the team will swiftly come back to you with further information and our availability.
Need quick plant identification?
Simply upload a few images of your problem plant to our identification form and one of our invasive plant experts will take a look and let you know, free of charge what you are dealing with. We’ll also be there to help with next steps where necessary.
