Skinner J discussed the application of section 58 of the 1980 Act saying: ‘that, in assessing whether a council has a defence under section 58 of the 1980 Act, it is necessary to take account of the sort of traffic which would foreseeable use the highway and the character of the road itself.’ and ‘In determining the regularity of highway inspections, the council had had regard only to the type of area in which the highway was situated and the likely degree and type of use. They should also have taken account of the actual design of the carriageway concerned, in this case tarmac and adjoined cobbles at the edge of the carriageway, rendering it particularly vulnerable to water penetration.’
Judges:
Skinner J
Citations:
Times 28-May-1984
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Approved – Harrison v Derby City Council CA 21-Apr-2008
The claimant injured herself tripping over a depression in the pavement. The council appealed a finding that it was in breach of its duty, saying that it had inspected the footway every six months.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Any collapse at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Personal Injury
Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.270557