||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 201 (Jun)
|| UKHL 28
||House of Lords
Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
||George Laurence QC and Ross Crail (instructed by Zermansky & Partners, Leeds) for the claimants.
||Timothy Mould QC and David Blundell (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State.
||Edwin Simpson (instructed by Blandy & Blandy, Reading) for the intervener.
||20 June 2007
Highway - Dedication - Presumption - Effect of presumption - Consideration of nature of evidence sufficient to demonstrate no intention to dedicate - Meaning of 'intention' - Whether landowners having sufficient evidence - , s 31(1).
Highway Dedication. On the true construction of s31(1) of the 'intention' meant what the relevant audience, namely the users of the way, would reasonably have understood the landowner's intention to be. The test was objective: not what the owner subjectively intended nor what particular users of the way subjectively assumed, but whether a reasonable user would have understood that the owner was intending to disabuse him of the notion that the way was a public highway.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- 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
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary