header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

An adjacent duty of care?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
08 June 2018 / Cathrine Grubb
Issue: 7796 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
nlj_7796_grubb

If a hedgerow or tree is a risk to motorists, can the landowner be held liable? Cathrine Grubb investigates

  • Are owners of land adjoining the highway liable for risks to motorists such as vegetation that restricts visibility?
  • Reviews the case of Sumner v Colborne & Others.

Accidents at road junctions are not unusual. However, in the case of Sumner v Colborne & Others [2018] EWCA Civ 1006 such an accident gave rise to a novel question: can owners of land adjoining the highway be liable for dangers on their land that make the highway more dangerous? The judgment in Sumner not only deals with this issue but provides a helpful illustration of how to determine whether a duty of care exists in novel cases.

The collision

The danger in Sumner was vegetation planted on adjoining land that severely restricted the visibility at a junction on the A494. The A494 had a 60-mph speed limit. Guidelines for the development of new junctions require stopping distance sight of at least 122m on such roads. The

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Alarm bells over Mazur
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Jury trial & a constitutional illusion
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
NLJ this week: The rise—and risks—of going private
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
NLJ this week: Human rights disputes push courts to redefine their role
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Debarment orders—shortcut or minefield?
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll