If the nest is not used at the moment, e.g. no eggs or chick inside, it is supposed to be not illegal to remove it. Common Magpie breed in winter and Koel is brood-parasitic. So (answer Q 1) I think they are not using the nest at this moment and therefore the gardener is not breaching the law.
Q2: There is a grey area on this situation. The Ordinance list that all wild bird's nest are protected, but do not specific whether active or inactive. So you may argue that inactive nest is also a nest. However, my PERSONAL INTERPRETATION is that the spirit of the ordinance is aim on protecting wild birds' life. So, I think it's acceptable if only active nest is protected. In fact, some birds build nest in village house's garden, conditioner...etc. It would cause many inconvenience if inactive nests are also protected.
However, I said grey area is because some bird's nest only inactive seasonally. That means the birds would use the same nest again in subsequent breeding season. In such case, the protection status of active/inactive nest is very vague....
Q3: There is no such permit for removing bird nest. Or it would be issued only in some very very rare case.
Q4: Yes, if it were. That mean if you can prove or even suspect there are eggs or chicks inside.
Please note that my interpretation may not be 100% correct. For official reply, please dial hotline 1823 for enquiry.
