header-logo header-logo

26 February 2010
Issue: 7406 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Highways

Herrick and another v Kidner and another [2010] EWHC 269 (Admin), [2010] All ER (D) 186 (Feb)

The construction to be placed on ss 130A-130D of the Highways Act 1980 was that they were designed to enable members of the public to compel highway authorities to protect and assert the rights of the public to go wherever they chose on a footpath so long as it was reasonable, usual and appropriate.

Any obstruction which significantly interfered with their ability to exercise their right to pass and repass and to enjoy amenity rights over each and every part of the footpath was caught by s 130B(4)(c). The public were not to be confined to a particular part or parts of a footpath.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll