||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 305 (Jul)
||Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Schiemann, Buxton and Longmore LJJ
||Peter Birts QC and Peter Mantell-Sayer (instructed by Ashton Graham, Bury St Edmunds) for the claimants.
||Douglas Edwards (instructed by Giles Pink, Stroud) for the local highway authority.
||22 July 2002
Highway - Diversion - Footpaths and bridleways - Claimants applying for diversion of footpath - Local authority making order to divert footpath - Objections being received - Local authority refusing to submit matter to Secretary of State for confirmation - Whether authority obliged to submit matter to Secretary of State - s 119.
Section119 of the gave a local highway authority a discretion not to embark upon the statutory process involved in footpath diversion, even where the condition precedent that such a diversion would be in a landowner's or the public's interest was fulfilled. Furthermore, there was no express duty on an authority to submit an opposed footpath diversion order to the Secretary of State to be confirmed, and given that an authority had a discretion as to whether to embark on the statutory process, there was no policy reason why such a duty should be implied.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary