Hampshire County Council v. Gillingham & Anor [2000] EWCA Civ 105 (5 April 2000)

Hampshire County Council v. Gillingham & Anor [2000] EWCA Civ 105 (5 April 2000)

The defendants unlawfully obstructed a public footpath by erecting a gate and post, failed to provide the full width required by law, and engaged in conduct likely to deter public use. The judge's acquaintance with Mr Drummond did not create a real danger of bias, as Mr Drummond was not a party or witness and the judge's impartiality was not compromised. Injunctive relief and removal orders were justified.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 105
Parties
Claimant: Hampshire County Council; Defendant: Leslie Keith Gillingham; Defendant: Ann Patricia Gillingham
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 April 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Public Rights of Way, Judicial Bias, Injunctions, Estoppel, Obstruction of Highways
Property Law Public Law Public Rights of Way Judicial Bias Injunctions Estoppel Obstruction of Highways

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hampshire County Council

Claimant

Leslie Keith Gillingham

Defendant

Ann Patricia Gillingham

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants unlawfully obstructed a public footpath
  2. 2 Whether the judge should have recused himself due to alleged bias
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' actions justified injunctive relief

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants unlawfully obstructed a public footpath by erecting a gate and post, failed to provide the full width required by law, and engaged in conduct likely to deter public use. The judge's acquaintance with Mr Drummond did not create a real danger of bias, as Mr Drummond was not a party or witness and the judge's impartiality was not compromised. Injunctive relief and removal orders were justified.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Defendants to remove wooden gate and concrete hanging post at Point A by noon on 19th October 1999
  • Defendants restrained from erecting any gate, fence, or obstruction on the public footpath between points B and C or elsewhere on the path