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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll