Griffiths v Gwynedd County Council (Rev 1) [2015] EWCA Civ 1440 (22 October 2015)
The defect, being at the extreme edge of a remote rural road, visible for 21 metres, and not ordinarily traversed by cyclists, was not objectively dangerous in the sense required by section 41 of the Highways Act 1980; the judge was entitled to find that danger was not reasonably to be anticipated from its continued use by the public.
- Citation
- [2015] EWCA Civ 1440
- Parties
- Claimant/applicant: Melvyn Griffiths; Defendant/respondent: Gwynedd County Council
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 22 October 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Wrexham County and Family Court Decision
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Highway Maintenance Liability, Dangerousness of Highway Defects, Section 41 Highways Act 1980, Section 58 Highways Act 1980 Statutory Defence, Standard of Care for Highway Authorities, Contributory Negligence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Melvyn Griffiths
Claimant/applicant
Gwynedd County Council
Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Wrexham County and Family Court Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defect in the road constituted a danger under section 41 of the Highways Act 1980
- 2 Whether the local authority breached its duty to maintain the highway
- 3 Whether the statutory defence under section 58 of the Highways Act 1980 was available
Ratio Decidendi
The defect, being at the extreme edge of a remote rural road, visible for 21 metres, and not ordinarily traversed by cyclists, was not objectively dangerous in the sense required by section 41 of the Highways Act 1980; the judge was entitled to find that danger was not reasonably to be anticipated from its continued use by the public.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment