The climate characteristic of Poland is cyclically capable of creating situations which result in obligations not always known to the interested people - this situation is undoubtedly damaged during the storm, the removal of which depends on the obtained permit.
The owner of the property on which the tree grew damaged during the storm, decided to cut it out [...] On the basis of the above, Article 88(1)(2) Act dated 16 April 2004 about conservation of nature, it was punished with a monetary penalty by the President of the City of Łódź.
Supreme Administrative Court in judgment of 19 July 2012, in the case reference no.: II OSK 810/11, When examining the case, Ewa P. ruled that trees that damaged the windstorm could not be cut without permission - regardless of the subjective assessment of the owner.
The owner of the property on which the tree grew damaged during the windstorm decided to cut it out due to a threat to the safety of people and vehicles on the property.
On the basis of the above, Article 88(1)(2) Act dated 16 April 2004 on nature conservation (Journal of Laws of 2013, item 627, i.e., Further: ‘The Nature Conservation Act’) was fined by the President of Łódź.
exhaustive the course of administrative proceedings, a complaint was lodged to the Provincial Administrative Court in Łódź, which in the judgment dated 10 December 2010, issued on the signature of the act: II SA/Łd 1069/10, stated that only "the competent authority, competent in nature conservation, is competent to assess whether a tree is dead or endangers safety".
The position of the Provincial Administrative Court was upheld by the Supreme Administrative Court citing Article 83(6) Nature Conservation Act, according to which only well-defined situations allow the tree to be removed without the permission granted.