Herrick & Anor v Kidner & Anor [2010] EWHC 269 (Admin) (17 February 2010)

Herrick & Anor v Kidner & Anor [2010] EWHC 269 (Admin) (17 February 2010)

An obstruction on a public footpath that prevents passage or enjoyment of amenity rights over any part of the highway constitutes a significant interference under section 130B(4)(c) of the Highways Act 1980, regardless of whether the public can pass elsewhere on the path. Highway authorities cannot lawfully authorise such obstructions except as permitted by statute, and any purported consent or acquiescence does not legalise the obstruction or prevent later enforcement action. The Crown Court was correct to order removal of the gates and central pillar as they significantly interfered with public rights of way.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 269 (Admin)
Parties
Claimants: Mr B Herrick and Mrs D Herrick; First Respondent: Peter Kidner; Second Respondent: Somerset County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Case Stated Appeal From Crown Court (administrative Court) / High Court Judgment on Case Stated
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Crown Court's order upheld.
Legal Topics
Obstruction of Highways, Public Rights of Way, Statutory Interpretation, Lawful Authority of Highway Authorities, Significant Interference With Rights of Way
Administrative Law Highways Law Public Law Obstruction of Highways Public Rights of Way Statutory Interpretation Lawful Authority of Highway Authorities Significant Interference With Rights of Way

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr B Herrick and Mrs D Herrick

Claimants

Peter Kidner

First Respondent

Somerset County Council

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Case Stated Appeal From Crown Court (administrative Court) / High Court Judgment on Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the gateway structure on footpath Y24/10 constitutes a significant interference with the exercise of public rights of way under section 130B(4)(c) of the Highways Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether the obstruction was without lawful authority such that the highway authority's powers under section 143 of the Highways Act 1980 remained exercisable
  3. 3 Whether the Crown Court had discretion to order removal of only part of the structure and to require installation of a fingerpost

Ratio Decidendi

An obstruction on a public footpath that prevents passage or enjoyment of amenity rights over any part of the highway constitutes a significant interference under section 130B(4)(c) of the Highways Act 1980, regardless of whether the public can pass elsewhere on the path. Highway authorities cannot lawfully authorise such obstructions except as permitted by statute, and any purported consent or acquiescence does not legalise the obstruction or prevent later enforcement action. The Crown Court was correct to order removal of the gates and central pillar as they significantly interfered with public rights of way.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Crown Court's order upheld.

Orders

  • Removal of the gates and central pillar of the gateway structure on footpath Y24/10.
  • Installation of a fingerpost outside the gateway to indicate the public right of way.