The Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the city of Edinburgh v. North British Railway Co. [1904] ScotLR 41_492 (12 May 1904)

The Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the city of Edinburgh v. North British Railway Co. [1904] ScotLR 41_492 (12 May 1904)

The pursuers failed to prove continuous public use as of right for the full prescriptive period, especially given the road's private origin and initial use by tolerance. Even if such use were established, a public right-of-way cannot be acquired over land held for statutory railway purposes where such a right would be inconsistent with those purposes. The statutory definition of 'street' in the Edinburgh Acts does not vest control or ownership in the Magistrates over railway property not already subject to a public right, nor does it prevent the railway company from appropriating its property to other uses.

Citation
[1904] ScotLR 41_492
Parties
Pursuer: The Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the city of Edinburgh; Defender: North British Railway Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 May 1904
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House, Court of Session
Outcome
Defenders assoilzied (absolved); appeal refused; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to assoilzie defenders.
Legal Topics
Public Right of Way, Prescription, Statutory Interpretation, Municipal Powers, Railway Statutory Purposes
Property Law Administrative Law Public Law Public Right of Way Prescription Statutory Interpretation Municipal Powers Railway Statutory Purposes

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 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the city of Edinburgh

Pursuer

North British Railway Company

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House, Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a public right-of-way has been established over Hope's Lane by prescription.
  2. 2 Whether Hope's Lane is a 'street' under the Edinburgh Municipal and Police Act 1879, thereby subject to municipal control.

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers failed to prove continuous public use as of right for the full prescriptive period, especially given the road's private origin and initial use by tolerance. Even if such use were established, a public right-of-way cannot be acquired over land held for statutory railway purposes where such a right would be inconsistent with those purposes. The statutory definition of 'street' in the Edinburgh Acts does not vest control or ownership in the Magistrates over railway property not already subject to a public right, nor does it prevent the railway company from appropriating its property to other uses.

Court Disposition

Defenders assoilzied (absolved); appeal refused; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to assoilzie defenders.

Orders

  • The Court adhered to the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor so far as it assoilzied the defenders.
  • No decree granted in terms of the pursuers' conclusions.