Parker & Ors v Nottinghamshire County Council & Anor

Parker & Ors v Nottinghamshire County Council & Anor

The Inspector's approach in considering the Inclosure Act and Award as primary evidence, followed by the Trent Navigation Act, was proper. The Order route was a highway, and the width was sufficiently described in compliance with statutory requirements. There was no legal or evidential inconsistency between the existence of a public highway and the haling path under the Navigation Act.

Parties
Claimant: The Personal Representatives of Mr Adrian Thomas Parker; Claimant: Mrs Susan Parker; 1st Defendant: Nottinghamshire County Council; 2nd Defendant: Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Public Rights of Way, Modification Orders, Historic Highway Creation, Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Property Law Public Rights of Way Modification Orders Historic Highway Creation 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 3 Authorities cited 9 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

Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector misdirected herself by failing to properly consider the Trent Navigation Act 1783
  2. 2 Whether the Modification Order adequately described the width of the restricted byway as required by statute

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's approach in considering the Inclosure Act and Award as primary evidence, followed by the Trent Navigation Act, was proper. The Order route was a highway, and the width was sufficiently described in compliance with statutory requirements. There was no legal or evidential inconsistency between the existence of a public highway and the haling path under the Navigation Act.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The Inspector’s Order Decision made on 15 October 2007 stands.
  • The Claimants’ challenge fails on all grounds.