The highway extended to a width of 50 feet. After adoption trees grew in that part not used as the actual road.
Held: Once a highway exists the public has a right to use the whole of the width of the highway and not just that part of it currently used to pass or re-pass. The Highway Board was entitled to cut the trees and the Plaintiff who had bought the adjoining land was not permitted to stop them.
Sir WM James VC said: ‘The right of the public is to have the whole width of the road preserved free from obstructions, and is not confined to that part which was used as via trita.’
Sir WM James VC
 LR 9 Eq 418
England and Wales
Cited – Smith, Regina (on the Application of) v The Land Registry (Peterborough Office) Admn 13-Feb-2009
The applicant sought judicial review of the cancellation of his application for first registration of land by adverse possession. The application had been rejected because a public right of way existed through it, and the claimant had not shown the . .
Cited – Hurst and Another v Hampshire County Council CA 19-Jun-1997
A Local Authority is liable for any damage to adjacent property caused by the roots of a tree growing on the verge of a public highway.
Held: Pre-adoption trees vest in the highway authority for all purposes. . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 May 2021; Ref: scu.320858