Lake District Special Planning Board, ex parte Bernstein; 3 Feb 1982

References: Times 03-Feb-1982
A diversion of a footpath must be along an entirely new path, and not an existing way.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Mear and others -v- Cambridgeshire County Council ChD (Bailii, [2006] EWHC 2554 (Ch))
    The claimants sought a declaration that a path over neighbouring land was a public vehicular highway as recorded by the respondents, and not a footpath as asserted by the owners, and that gates over the path infringed the public rights. The council . .