Trail Riders' Fellowship & Anor, R (on the application of) v Dorset County Council [2012] EWHC 2634 (Admin) (02 October 2012)

Trail Riders' Fellowship & Anor, R (on the application of) v Dorset County Council [2012] EWHC 2634 (Admin) (02 October 2012)

The applications failed because the maps submitted were not drawn to a scale of no less than 1:25,000 as required by paragraph 1 of Schedule 14 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The maps were enlargements of 1:50,000 scale maps and did not provide the level of detail intended by the legislation. The de minimis principle did not apply to this substantial non-compliance.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 2634 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Trail Riders' Fellowship; Claimant: David Leonard Tilbury; Defendant: Dorset County Council; Interested Party: Secretary of State for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Interested Party: Philip Graham Plumbe
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Definitive Map Modification Orders, Public Rights of Way, Statutory Interpretation, Compliance With Statutory Requirements, De Minimis Principle
Administrative Law Environmental Law Public Law Definitive Map Modification Orders Public Rights of Way Statutory Interpretation Compliance With Statutory Requirements De Minimis Principle

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trail Riders' Fellowship

Claimant

David Leonard Tilbury

Claimant

Dorset County Council

Defendant

Secretary of State for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs

Interested Party

Philip Graham Plumbe

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applications for modification orders were accompanied by maps drawn to the prescribed scale as required by paragraph 1 of Schedule 14 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether any non-compliance with the prescribed scale requirement was de minimis and could be excused

Ratio Decidendi

The applications failed because the maps submitted were not drawn to a scale of no less than 1:25,000 as required by paragraph 1 of Schedule 14 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The maps were enlargements of 1:50,000 scale maps and did not provide the level of detail intended by the legislation. The de minimis principle did not apply to this substantial non-compliance.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed