Landowners sought judicial review of the decision of the highway authority to refuse an application under section 117 of the 1980 Act for a highway to be stopped up under section 116. They said that the highway was unnecessary as such because it was covered with shrubbery and had never been maintained by the authority.
Held: When deciding whether a strip of land was unnecessary for the performance of highway functions the starting point was whether or not it was used for passing or re-passing, but in considering the matter it would be necessary to consider whether the land was performing an amenity or other function which required the trees or fences to be there, whether for amenity, verge protection or some other purpose. It could be necessary for the highway to perform a function in relation to safety or access for third parties.
Judges:
Ouseley J
Citations:
[2006] EWHC 661 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Herrick and Another v Kidner and Another Admn 17-Feb-2010
Psychological Obstruction to Public Footpath
A public footpath crossed the appellants’ land. They constructed a gateway across it which they now accepted had been a significant obstruction of the right of way. The local authority served a notice requiring its removal, including the stone . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.244849