Roxlena Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Cumbria County Council [2017] EWHC 2651 (Admin) (30 November 2017)

Roxlena Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Cumbria County Council [2017] EWHC 2651 (Admin) (30 November 2017)

The council acted lawfully in authorising the making of the order to add the footpaths and bridleway to the definitive map. The sufficiency of evidence and route alignment was a matter of judgment for the committee, and there was no plain error of law or irrationality. The council was entitled to rely on previously discovered evidence under its continuous review duty, and the evidence for the bridleway was sufficient to justify the order. The grounds of challenge were not made out.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2651 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Roxlena Limited; Defendant: Cumbria County Council; Interested Party: Peter Lamb
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment in Administrative Court
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Public Rights of Way, Definitive Map Modification Orders, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Planning Law Property Law Public Rights of Way Definitive Map Modification Orders Judicial Review Statutory Interpretation Procedural Fairness

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roxlena Limited

Claimant

Cumbria County Council

Defendant

Peter Lamb

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment in Administrative Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the council acted lawfully in authorising a statutory order to add footpaths and a bridleway to the definitive map
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence of route alignment for the rights of way
  3. 3 Whether there was sufficient evidence of 20 years' uninterrupted enjoyment

Ratio Decidendi

The council acted lawfully in authorising the making of the order to add the footpaths and bridleway to the definitive map. The sufficiency of evidence and route alignment was a matter of judgment for the committee, and there was no plain error of law or irrationality. The council was entitled to rely on previously discovered evidence under its continuous review duty, and the evidence for the bridleway was sufficient to justify the order. The grounds of challenge were not made out.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review refused
  • No order quashing the council's decision