The\u00adre is hard\u00adly any other issue that cau\u00adses dis\u00adpu\u00adtes in neigh\u00adbour\u00adhoods quite as relia\u00adbly as trees, hedges and over\u00adhan\u00adging bran\u00adches. Anyo\u00adne who sim\u00adply rea\u00adches for the hedge trim\u00admer wit\u00adhout kno\u00adwing the legal rules risks get\u00adting into trou\u00adble. An over\u00adview of the most important regu\u00adla\u00adti\u00adons and recent court rulings.<\/p>\n
First of all, an important basic rule: from 1 March to 30 Sep\u00adtem\u00adber, hea\u00advy pru\u00adning or the rem\u00adoval of hedges, living fen\u00adces, bus\u00adhes and other woo\u00addy plants is strict\u00adly pro\u00adhi\u00adbi\u00adted. The Fede\u00adral Natu\u00adre Con\u00adser\u00adva\u00adti\u00adon Act pro\u00adtects bree\u00adding birds and other ani\u00admals during this peri\u00adod. Anyo\u00adne who brea\u00adches this rule may face a hef\u00adty fine. From Octo\u00adber onwards, more exten\u00adsi\u00adve pru\u00adning is per\u00admit\u00adted again, pro\u00advi\u00added that the other legal requi\u00adre\u00adments are met.<\/p>\n
Sur\u00adpri\u00adsing, but legal\u00adly clear: in many fede\u00adral sta\u00adtes, a hedge is allo\u00adwed to grow as tall as it likes, pro\u00advi\u00added the pre\u00adscri\u00adbed boun\u00adda\u00adry distance is main\u00adtai\u00adned. In July 2026, the Hig\u00adher Regio\u00adnal Court of Frank\u00adfurt am Main ruled in a dis\u00adpu\u00adte over a seven-met\u00adre-high bam\u00adboo hedge that the neigh\u00adbour in Hes\u00adse had no right to demand that it be cut back. The court also made it clear that bam\u00adboo is con\u00adside\u00adred a hedge in the legal sen\u00adse (Frank\u00adfurt am Main Hig\u00adher Regio\u00adnal Court, jud\u00adge\u00adment of 1 July 2026, ref. 17 U 132\/22).<\/p>\n
If a plant is situa\u00adted on a plot of land that is hig\u00adher than the neigh\u00adbou\u00adring plot, the ques\u00adti\u00adon ari\u00adses as to the level from which the per\u00admis\u00adsi\u00adble height is mea\u00adsu\u00adred. The Fede\u00adral Court of Jus\u00adti\u00adce has ruled on this mat\u00adter: as a gene\u00adral rule, the point at which the plant emer\u00adges from the ground is decisi\u00adve. The level of the neigh\u00adbou\u00adring plot, which is lower, is only rele\u00advant in excep\u00adtio\u00adnal cases (Fede\u00adral Court of Jus\u00adti\u00adce, jud\u00adge\u00adment of 27 June 2025, ref. V ZR 180\/24).<\/p>\n
The Ger\u00adman Civil Code does not con\u00adtain any gene\u00adral rules on boun\u00adda\u00adry distances for trees and shrubs; such pro\u00advi\u00adsi\u00adons are set out in the laws gover\u00adning neigh\u00adbour\u00adly rela\u00adti\u00adons in the indi\u00advi\u00addu\u00adal fede\u00adral sta\u00adtes. Bre\u00admen, Ham\u00adburg and Meck\u00adlen\u00adburg-Wes\u00adtern Pome\u00adra\u00adnia do not have their own regu\u00adla\u00adti\u00adons in this regard. As a gene\u00adral rule, anyo\u00adne who has to tole\u00adra\u00adte sha\u00adde cast by a neighbour\u2019s trees has no legal right to have them pru\u00adn\u00aded or fel\u00adled if the boun\u00adda\u00adry distances sti\u00adpu\u00adla\u00adted under sta\u00adte law are obser\u00adved. The Fede\u00adral Court of Jus\u00adti\u00adce (BGH) has con\u00adfirm\u00aded this line of reaso\u00adning on seve\u00adral occa\u00adsi\u00adons (BGH, jud\u00adge\u00adment of 20 Sep\u00adtem\u00adber 2019, ref. V ZR 218\/18; BGH, jud\u00adge\u00adment of 10 July 2015, ref. V ZR 229\/14).<\/p>\n
If bran\u00adches are han\u00adging over onto your own pro\u00adper\u00adty, you must not sim\u00adply cut them off. You must first ask your neigh\u00adbour to cut them back them\u00adsel\u00adves, set\u00adting a reasonable dead\u00adline for them to do so. If the neigh\u00adbour fails to respond, Sec\u00adtion 910 of the Ger\u00adman Civil Code (BGB) per\u00admits you to cut them back yours\u00adelf, even if this could result in the tree dying (Fede\u00adral Court of Jus\u00adti\u00adce, jud\u00adge\u00adment of 11 June 2021, ref. V ZR 234\/19). Con\u00adver\u00adse\u00adly, unpro\u00adfes\u00adsio\u00adnal pru\u00adning can pro\u00adve cos\u00adt\u00adly: a Regio\u00adnal Court award\u00aded a pro\u00adper\u00adty owner 750 euros in dama\u00adges becau\u00adse his orna\u00admen\u00adtal cher\u00adry tree had been dama\u00adged (Coburg Regio\u00adnal Court, jud\u00adge\u00adment of 9 June 2006, ref. 33 S 26\/06).<\/p>\n
Anyo\u00adne who waits too long may lose their right to cla\u00adim: the Fede\u00adral Court of Jus\u00adti\u00adce (BGH) has ruled that the right to have over\u00adhan\u00adging bran\u00adches pru\u00adn\u00aded is sub\u00adject to the stan\u00addard three-year limi\u00adta\u00adti\u00adon peri\u00adod (BGH, jud\u00adge\u00adment of 22 Febru\u00adary 2019, ref. V ZR 136\/18). Regard\u00adless of any dis\u00adpu\u00adtes with neigh\u00adbours, pro\u00adper\u00adty owners must regu\u00adlar\u00adly check their trees for sta\u00adbi\u00adli\u00adty and health. Anyo\u00adne who brea\u00adches this duty of care and who\u00adse tree con\u00adse\u00adquent\u00adly cau\u00adses dama\u00adge is lia\u00adble for it. In the case of storm dama\u00adge, howe\u00adver, lia\u00adbi\u00adli\u00adty only appli\u00ades if it can be pro\u00adven that main\u00adten\u00adan\u00adce was neglected.<\/p>\n
As neigh\u00adbours\u2019 rights are hea\u00advi\u00adly depen\u00addent on the laws of the respec\u00adti\u00adve fede\u00adral sta\u00adtes, it is advi\u00adsa\u00adble to seek legal advice in the event of spe\u00adci\u00adfic dis\u00adpu\u00adtes in order to cla\u00adri\u00adfy the regu\u00adla\u00adti\u00adons appli\u00adca\u00adble in each indi\u00advi\u00addu\u00adal case.<\/p>\n