Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Mud, mud, glorious mud..
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bury the Trash" data-source="post: 7958312" data-attributes="member: 12099"><p> <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The general rule of law relating to the extent of the space subject to the public right of passage was stated in <em>Regina v United Kingdom Electric Telegraph Co Ltd (1862) 26 JP 390</em>, by Martin B, as follows: <em>In the case of an ordinary highway, although it may be of a varying and unequal width, running between fences on each side, the right of passage or way prima facie, unless there be evidence to the contrary, extends to the whole space between the fences, and the public are entitled to the use of the entire of it as a highway, and are not confined to the part which may be metalled...a permanent obstruction erected on a highway, placed there without lawful authority, which renders the way less commodious than before to the public, is an unlawful act and a public nuisance at common law...</em></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>This presumption that a highway extends over the whole space between fences may however be rebutted by proof of facts from which it may be inferred that the fences were not put up as boundaries of the highway; thus they may be part of the original boundary of a close of land through which the highway had been made. </strong></span><em><strong><span style="font-size: 18px">AG and Croydon RDC v Moorson-Roberts (1908) 72 JP 123.</span></strong></em></li> </ol></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bury the Trash, post: 7958312, member: 12099"] [LIST=1] [*]The general rule of law relating to the extent of the space subject to the public right of passage was stated in [I]Regina v United Kingdom Electric Telegraph Co Ltd (1862) 26 JP 390[/I], by Martin B, as follows: [I]In the case of an ordinary highway, although it may be of a varying and unequal width, running between fences on each side, the right of passage or way prima facie, unless there be evidence to the contrary, extends to the whole space between the fences, and the public are entitled to the use of the entire of it as a highway, and are not confined to the part which may be metalled...a permanent obstruction erected on a highway, placed there without lawful authority, which renders the way less commodious than before to the public, is an unlawful act and a public nuisance at common law...[/I] [*][B][SIZE=5] [/SIZE][/B] [*][SIZE=5][B]This presumption that a highway extends over the whole space between fences may however be rebutted by proof of facts from which it may be inferred that the fences were not put up as boundaries of the highway; thus they may be part of the original boundary of a close of land through which the highway had been made. [/B][/SIZE][I][B][SIZE=5]AG and Croydon RDC v Moorson-Roberts (1908) 72 JP 123.[/SIZE][/B][/I] [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Mud, mud, glorious mud..
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top