Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Welsh Ministers [2020] EWHC 1993 (Admin) (30 July 2020)

Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Welsh Ministers [2020] EWHC 1993 (Admin) (30 July 2020)

The inspector was entitled, on the balance of probabilities and on the documentary evidence, to conclude that a public right of way existed over the order route prior to the construction of the railway. The inspector's reasoning was not irrational, did not involve material error of fact, did not fail to take into account material considerations, was adequately reasoned, and did not breach natural justice or procedural fairness. The challenge amounted to a disagreement with the inspector's conclusions rather than a legal error.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1993 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd; Defendant: Welsh Ministers; Interested Party: Conwy County Borough Council; Interested Party: Guto Bebb; Interested Party: Mike Priestley; Interested Party: Ramblers; Interested Party: Roger and Glenys Arden; Interested Party: J and K Pitt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Definitive Map Modification Order, Public Right of Way, Judicial Review, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Highways Act 1980, Railway Regulation Acts, Adequacy of Reasons, Material Error of Fact, Natural Justice
Administrative Law Planning Law Public Rights of Way Definitive Map Modification Order Public Right of Way Judicial Review Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Highways Act 1980 +4 more

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd

Claimant

Welsh Ministers

Defendant

Conwy County Borough Council

Interested Party

Guto Bebb

Interested Party

Mike Priestley

Interested Party

Ramblers

Interested Party

Roger and Glenys Arden

Interested Party

J and K Pitt

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the inspector's confirmation of a public right of way over land owned by the claimant was lawful
  2. 2 Whether the inspector's reasoning was irrational, involved material error of fact, failed to take into account material considerations, was inadequately reasoned, or breached natural justice

Ratio Decidendi

The inspector was entitled, on the balance of probabilities and on the documentary evidence, to conclude that a public right of way existed over the order route prior to the construction of the railway. The inspector's reasoning was not irrational, did not involve material error of fact, did not fail to take into account material considerations, was adequately reasoned, and did not breach natural justice or procedural fairness. The challenge amounted to a disagreement with the inspector's conclusions rather than a legal error.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The claimant's application is dismissed.
  • The order confirming the public right of way stands.