Buckland & Ors v Secretary Of State For Environment Transport & Regions [2000] EWHC Admin 279 (11 January 2000)

Buckland & Ors v Secretary Of State For Environment Transport & Regions [2000] EWHC Admin 279 (11 January 2000)

The Inspector's decision was fundamentally flawed because he proceeded on the basis that the Inclosure Commissioners had lawful authority to create a public highway by the Award, when in fact they did not have such power under the 1797 Act. The Inspector failed to critically examine the evidence of public user in...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2000] EWHC Admin 279
Parties
Applicant: Applicants; Respondent: Secretary of State (acting by his Inspector)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 January 2000
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application Under Paragraph 12 of Schedule 15 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 / Judgment on Application to Quash Inspector's Decision
Outcome
Application allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.
Legal Topics
Definitive Map Modification Orders, Public Rights of Way, Statutory Interpretation, Ultra Vires Acts, Inclosure Awards
Administrative Law Environmental Law Property Law Definitive Map Modification Orders Public Rights of Way Statutory Interpretation Ultra Vires Acts Inclosure Awards

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicants

Applicant

Secretary of State (acting by his Inspector)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application Under Paragraph 12 of Schedule 15 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 / Judgment on Application to Quash Inspector's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Inspector erred in law in confirming the modification order to show the route as a Byway Open to All Traffic (BOAT)
  2. 2 Whether the Inclosure Award lawfully created a public highway over Barton Drove
  3. 3 Whether sufficient evidence existed of public user to establish a public highway by dedication

Ratio Decidendi

The Inspector's decision was fundamentally flawed because he proceeded on the basis that the Inclosure Commissioners had lawful authority to create a public highway by the Award, when in fact they did not have such power under the 1797 Act. The Inspector failed to critically examine the evidence of public user in light of the Commissioners' lack of power. This error invalidated the decision, and the court cannot substitute its own evaluation of the evidence.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; Inspector's decision quashed.

Orders

  • The decision of the Inspector dated 8 January 1998 is quashed.