The claimants challenged rejection of five applications under section 5 of the 1981 Act for modification orders allowing the upgrade of routes to provide vehicular public rights of way. The applications had been submitted using digital mapping. The Council said that the maps did not accord with the legislation.
Held: The application failed: ‘there was no strict compliance with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Schedule 14 to the 1981 Act. The maps which accompanied the applications were not drawn to a scale of no less than 1:25,000.’ Moreover, the departures were not such as to fall within a de minimis principle: ‘a map to a scale of 1:50,000 is very different from a map to a scale of 1:25,000, in particular, in terms of the detail relevant to the routes of the claimed ways and their impact relative to surrounding features.’
Judges:
Supperstone J
Citations:
[2012] EWHC 2634 (Admin), [2013] PTSR 302
Links:
Statutes:
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 53(5), Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, Wildlife and Countryside (Definitive Maps and Statements) Regulations 1993, Highways Act 1980 130
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Winchester College and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs CA 29-Apr-2008
The college appealed against modifications of definitive map to upgrade two footpaths to byways open to all traffic. The college was circled by footpaths which it wished to protect when the council constructed a new bypass.
Held: The College’s . .
Cited – Maroudas v Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs CA 18-Mar-2010
The claimant appealed against an order refusing his request to quash a footpath modification order. The request had not been signed as required.
Held: The appeal succeeded. ‘subject to the de minimis principle, an application must strictly . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Trail Riders Fellowship and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Dorset County Council and Others CA 20-May-2013
The Fellowship had applied for orders upgrading public rights of way. The council rejected the applications saying that the digital mapping software used to repare the maps submitted were not compliant with the requirements of the legislation. They . .
At first Instance – Trail Riders Fellowship and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Dorset County Council SC 18-Mar-2015
Objection had been made that a plan, used to register a right of way before it would disappear if un-registered, was to the wrong scale and that therefore the application was ineffetive.
Held: The Council’s appeal failed. The plan was too . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land, Administrative
Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.464625