A dispute between neighbors, of which no one really knows yet what it is about, has resulted in the destruction of the yew hedge and rhododendrons in Heusden-Zolder. A couple saw their two-metre-high hedge partially withered and the letter Z sprayed into it in one spot. Several rhododendrons also gave up the ghost.
READ ALSO. “I know why you are here”: how neighborly dispute in the ‘Beverly Hills of Limburg’ leads to a damage claim of 177,000 euros
The hedge owners took action and installed a camera in July 2021. The images showed how their neighbor kept returning to the hedge. Similarly, on July 11, just after midnight he drove up in his car and stuck a spray lance through the open window. The driver sprayed and atomized a liquid on the neighbor’s hedge. The perpetrator also suggested that it may have been a vacuum cleaner tube sticking out of the window of his car. “An unbelievable statement,” said the judge. Also because it was a spacious vehicle such as a Ford Transit. A study by Ghent University revealed that there were no fewer than 15 toxic substances in the soil.
© rr
Shared responsibility
After the judge at first instance found the fifty-something guilty last year, the appeal judge now also shares the same opinion. The neighbor across the street is guilty of destroying the hedge. The defense argued that the camera images had been obtained in a tricky and unlawful manner, but that argument was not heard. Based on the images, among other things, the man was found guilty of destroying the hedge and the rhododendrons. When determining the sentence, the judge took into account that the facts were part of a years-long dispute between neighbors. “Responsibility must lie with both parties. The court expects that the sentence will be sufficient to deter the perpetrator from committing such crimes in the future.”
READ ALSO. Couple demands 200,000 euros after neighbor sprays their hedges: “And why has he been filming me day and night for ten years?”
The ruling has now been reduced to suspension. In short, the man was found guilty but received no punishment. The convicted person may still have to pay hefty compensation. The victims demand 177,000 euros to restore their hedge. The Court of Appeal, like the judge at first instance, confirms that an appointed court expert, specialized in garden and landscaping, must draw up a budget. “My clients are satisfied that it was also ruled at the appeal level that there is no doubt that their neighbor is responsible for the destruction of the hedge. They hope that peace will return and have confidence in the further handling of the file,” said Tom Van Overbeke, lawyer for the victims.
“My clients are satisfied that it was also ruled on appeal that there is no doubt that their neighbor is responsible for the destruction of the hedge. They hope that peace will return”
Tom Van Overbeke
Victims lawyer
“We are satisfied that the court expressly refers to the co-responsibility of the neighbors”
Erik Schellingen
Perpetrator lawyer
Erik Schellingen, lawyer for the perpetrator, also accepts the judgment and hopes that peace can now return. “We are satisfied that the court does not impose any punishment on my client and explicitly refers to the co-responsibility of the neighbors for the years-long problems. In addition, we are pleased that the astronomical compensation was reduced to a small fraction, for which an expert can now make an advice in good conscience.”
© rr
){kind=link}