September 14, 2026, 9:40 am | Read time: 3 minutes
Allergy sufferers know the annoying tickle in the nose and constant sneezing as soon as pollen starts flying again. It’s even worse when your neighbor has the exact tree in their yard that triggers your strongest reactions. But what can residents do when the allergy becomes too severe? Can the allergy-inducing tree be removed even if it’s on the neighbor’s property? myHOMEBOOK spoke with a lawyer about this.
Follow myHOMEBOOK on WhatsApp now
Court Already Ruled on an Allergy Case
In an interview with myHOMEBOOK, lawyer Nicole Mutschke discusses a case from 2019: “The Federal Court of Justice ruled on a dispute involving three birch trees about 18 meters tall. The plaintiff and his daughter cited a birch pollen allergy and wanted the trees removed.” Ultimately, the Federal Court of Justice dismissed the lawsuit because the trees were healthy and the required boundary distances were lawfully maintained.
Are Only Allergy-Friendly Trees Allowed?
Allergy sufferers living in the neighborhood naturally wish for mutual consideration. Addressing the allergy and trying to find a common solution can prevent neighborhood disputes. At the same time, Nicole Mutschke emphasizes that a property owner does not have to remove every plant to which their neighbor is allergic.
The 2019 case shows that healthy and properly planted trees are rarely challenged in court. Pollen allergy sufferers must, in the worst case, accept the natural pollen flight.
The Regulation for Severe Complaints
However, the legal situation changes depending on the severity of the allergic condition. It is indeed considered how strongly allergy-inducing, or “toxic,” the plant is. Nicole Mutschke explains that the greater the general health risk, the more likely removal can be demanded. If a plant causes health issues only for a sensitive person, it becomes more complicated.
For those affected, it is then necessary to medically prove that this plant species triggers the symptoms. “The Higher Administrative Court of North Rhine-Westphalia made it clear in 2003 that a mere general allergy is not sufficient,” reports the lawyer.
What Rights Apply to Public Properties?
There is also a case from 2011 in Hanover regarding “public properties.” A woman filed a lawsuit in the administrative court due to respiratory issues and allergic reactions. According to the plaintiff, several large linden trees in the public street area caused the symptoms. Nevertheless, the trees were not felled.
Thus, the case shows that even in public places, an individual’s allergy usually isn’t enough.
Also interesting: Who removes weeds on the sidewalk in front of the house?
5 Quirky Facts Realtors Should Share Before a Home Purchase
The Pumpkin Grows Over to the Neighbor’s Yard–Can He Keep It?
When Is Legal Assistance Worthwhile?
At the latest, when significant health complaints are medically documented and an amicable solution with the neighbor is not possible, a legal review is certainly advisable. “It should be clarified whether boundary distances are maintained, whether special tree protection rules apply, and whether the plant is even lawfully there,” explains Nicole Mutschke. The lawyer emphasizes that the rules, especially in neighbor law, vary from state to state.
Also interesting: When you are allowed to cut overhanging branches from the neighbor’s tree
What Are the Chances in a Legal Dispute?
“With a healthy and lawfully standing tree, the owner usually has the upper hand,” says Mutschke. Even severe allergic complaints do not automatically lead to the tree being felled, according to the Federal Court of Justice’s case law. However, the lawyer notes that the assessment may differ if the plant itself poses a particularly strong allergenic or other health risk. Additionally, there is a clear focus on compliance with neighbor law regulations.