Moore & Anor v The Secretary Of State For The Environment, Food & Rural Affairs & Ors [2025] EWHC 3313 (Admin) (17 December 2025)

Moore & Anor v The Secretary Of State For The Environment, Food & Rural Affairs & Ors [2025] EWHC 3313 (Admin) (17 December 2025)

The Inspector lawfully found an irreconcilable conflict between the Definitive Map and Statement by applying the correct legal principles and focusing on the reasonable interpretation of the documents in light of the physical circumstances at the relevant date. The Inspector did not unlawfully rely on extrinsic evidence in making this finding, nor did she fail to consider material expert evidence or breach procedural fairness. The statutory challenge is dismissed.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 3313 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: David Moore; Claimant: Dawn Moore; First Defendant: Secretary of State for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Second Defendant: Hertfordshire County Council; Third Defendant: Anthony Barrett
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Statutory Challenge Under Paragraph 12, Schedule 15 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 / High Court Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Definitive Map and Statement Modification, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Interpretation of Statutory Documents, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Review Standards
Administrative Law Planning Law Public Rights of Way Definitive Map and Statement Modification Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Interpretation of Statutory Documents Procedural Fairness Judicial Review Standards

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Moore

Claimant

Dawn Moore

Claimant

Secretary of State for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs

First Defendant

Hertfordshire County Council

Second Defendant

Anthony Barrett

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Statutory Challenge Under Paragraph 12, Schedule 15 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 / High Court Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector lawfully found an irreconcilable conflict between the Definitive Map and Statement justifying modification of the public bridleway route
  2. 2 Whether the Inspector erred in law by relying on extrinsic evidence or failing to consider material evidence
  3. 3 Whether the Inspector breached procedural fairness in her findings regarding the bridleway alignment

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector lawfully found an irreconcilable conflict between the Definitive Map and Statement by applying the correct legal principles and focusing on the reasonable interpretation of the documents in light of the physical circumstances at the relevant date. The Inspector did not unlawfully rely on extrinsic evidence in making this finding, nor did she fail to consider material expert evidence or breach procedural fairness. The statutory challenge is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Statutory challenge dismissed; Order of the Inspector confirming the modification of the Definitive Map and Statement stands.