The richest college in Oxford is entering legal proceedings against a retiree over a short length of hedgerow in a case predicted to run up £150,000 worth of legal costs.
The 180-yard hedge in question divides a one-acre plot of land owned by Anthony Bethell, a former architect, and a 1,200-acre plot owned by St John’s. After attempts to resolve a boundary dispute via mediation, the matter has been taken to court and £80,000 already spent by both parties.
Judge Gregory, presiding over the pretrial hearing at Coventry Crown Court, commenting on what he has labelled “the most expensive hedge in Warwickshire”, remarked that both sides might as well “pile up £30,000 each in a field and light a huge bonfire”.
Mr Bethell initially told the Telegraph that he attempted to clarify the boundary in order to restore and replant the hedge, having commissioned a report on the hedge which found it was “neglected, sparse and misshapen”, recommending restoration in the Midlands Style of hedge laying. “They won’t just sit down and discuss the issue face to face,” he said. “They’ve ignored all my approaches and left me with no choice but to go to court.”
“Given how much land they own, you’d think they’d want to quickly settle a dispute over a tiny bit of hedge in Warwickshire,” he added.
However, the Principal Bursar of the College, Andrew Parker, told Cherwell that St John’s had in fact made repeated attempts to resolve the dispute. “The legal action and court proceedings have been initiated against St John’s College by Mr Bethell. Despite attempts to settle the matter by meetings between professional advisers and by mediation, the College regrets that it is necessary to have the matter resolved by the courts.
“Contrary to what sections of the press have reported, the College engaged with Mr Bethell prior to proceedings and agreed the position of the relevant boundary with him and his agents. Mr Bethell has now brought proceedings claiming a different location for the boundary. It is open to Mr Bethell to bring these proceedings to a close simply by agreeing to adhere to the previously concluded agreement.”
Mr Bethell was contacted by Cherwell but following consultation with his legal advisers decided not to comment further.
