Parker & Ors v Nottinghamshire County Council & Anor [2009] EWHC 229 (Admin) (13 February 2009)

Parker & Ors v Nottinghamshire County Council & Anor [2009] EWHC 229 (Admin) (13 February 2009)

The Inspector's approach in considering the Inclosure Act and Award as the primary evidence for the existence of the public right of way, and subsequently considering the Trent Navigation Act, was proper. The evidence supported the existence of a public highway, and the Order's description of the width was sufficient to comply with statutory requirements. There was no misdirection or legal error.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 229 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: The Personal Representatives of Mr Adrian Thomas Parker; Claimant: Mrs Susan Parker; 1st Defendant: Nottinghamshire County Council; 2nd Defendant: The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Definitive Map Modification Orders, Public Rights of Way, Historic Highways, Statutory Interpretation, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
Administrative Law Property Law Definitive Map Modification Orders Public Rights of Way Historic Highways Statutory Interpretation Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Personal Representatives of Mr Adrian Thomas Parker

Claimant

Mrs Susan Parker

Claimant

Nottinghamshire County Council

1st Defendant

The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Modification Order adding a restricted byway was within the powers of section 53 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether the Order failed to adequately describe the width of the right of way
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector misdirected herself regarding the effect of the Trent Navigation Act 1783

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's approach in considering the Inclosure Act and Award as the primary evidence for the existence of the public right of way, and subsequently considering the Trent Navigation Act, was proper. The evidence supported the existence of a public highway, and the Order's description of the width was sufficient to comply with statutory requirements. There was no misdirection or legal error.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Claimants' application to quash the Order is dismissed