Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2007] All ER (D) 201 (Jun)
Neutral Citation: [2007] UKHL 28
Court: House of Lords

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury

Representation 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.
Judgment Dates: 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).

The Case

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.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.