header-logo header-logo

29 April 2010 / John Summers
Issue: 7415 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

The long & winding road

Once a highway, always a highway? asks John Summers

In R (Smith) v The Land Registry [2010] EWCA Civ 200 Mr Smith occupied a caravan and other land on a byway in Cambridgeshire for over 12 years. The evidence was that he did not obstruct the byway and kept his land tidy. He applied to the Land Registry for first registration of the land by reason of his adverse possession of it. The local council objected to the application on the basis that the land was shown on the relevant definitive map as a public highway open to all traffic. The Land Registry refused the application because the land in question was a public highway. Mr Smith brought judicial review proceedings to challenge the Land Registry’s decision. His claim was dismissed at first instance and he appealed.

Judgments

All three members of the Court of Appeal gave reasoned judgments. Arden LJ noted that while there was a long standing saying in English law to the effect, “Once a highway, always a highway”,

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll