Derren McLeish & Anor v The Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs & Anor

Derren McLeish & Anor v The Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs & Anor

The inspector applied the correct legal approach by considering whether the alternative route was correct on the balance of probabilities, rebutting the presumption against change, and took into account all relevant evidence including map evidence; the claimants' grounds were rejected as the inspector's reasoning was rational and lawful.

Parties
Claimant: Mr Derren McLeish; Claimant: Mrs Kathryn Joan McLeish; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Second Defendant: Kent County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review/statutory Challenge / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Definitive Map Modification Orders, Public Rights of Way, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Public Law Property Law Definitive Map Modification Orders Public Rights of Way Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Judicial Review Statutory Interpretation

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Derren McLeish

Claimant

Mrs Kathryn Joan McLeish

Claimant

Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

First Defendant

Kent County Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review/statutory Challenge / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector failed to direct herself on the evidential weight to be given to the 1952 Definitive Map and Statement under section 56 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether the inspector failed to identify and reason the primary question of the correct alignment of the footpath
  3. 3 Whether the inspector failed to draw properly reasoned inferences from the evidential material, left relevant evidence out of account, or gave relevant evidence no weight without explanation

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector applied the correct legal approach by considering whether the alternative route was correct on the balance of probabilities, rebutting the presumption against change, and took into account all relevant evidence including map evidence; the claimants' grounds were rejected as the inspector's reasoning was rational and lawful.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed