Abbots Ride Land Ltd v Surrey County Council & Anor [2019] EWHC 3560 (QB) (27 November 2019)

Abbots Ride Land Ltd v Surrey County Council & Anor [2019] EWHC 3560 (QB) (27 November 2019)

The judge was entitled to infer from the totality of the evidence that both Macari (the original landowner) and the Turners (subsequent owners of part of the Verge) intended to dedicate the Verge as highway, and that the public (through the Council's actions) accepted such dedication. The annotation on the 1957 agreement plan, subsequent conduct, and lack of protest when the land was treated as highway supported this inference. The appeal was dismissed as the County Court's findings were within the bounds of reasonable factual inference.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 3560
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Abbots Ride Land Limited; First Defendant/respondent: Surrey County Council; Second Defendant/respondent: Wates Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court (queen's Bench Division) on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Dedication of Highway, Public Rights of Way, Express and Implied Dedication, Interpretation of Agreements, Land Transfer and Improvement Lines
Property Law Highways Law Administrative Law Dedication of Highway Public Rights of Way Express and Implied Dedication Interpretation of Agreements Land Transfer and Improvement Lines

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abbots Ride Land Limited

Claimant/appellant

Surrey County Council

First Defendant/respondent

Wates Developments Limited

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court (queen's Bench Division) on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Verge adjoining Waverley Lane is a highway or part of a highway subject to public rights of way
  2. 2 Whether there was express or implied dedication of the Verge as highway by the landowner(s)
  3. 3 Effect of subsequent land transfers on dedication

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to infer from the totality of the evidence that both Macari (the original landowner) and the Turners (subsequent owners of part of the Verge) intended to dedicate the Verge as highway, and that the public (through the Council's actions) accepted such dedication. The annotation on the 1957 agreement plan, subsequent conduct, and lack of protest when the land was treated as highway supported this inference. The appeal was dismissed as the County Court's findings were within the bounds of reasonable factual inference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration refused that the Verge is not a highway or part of a highway subject to public rights of way