AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Civ v yoink9/23/2023 ![]() The responsibility was a public responsibility, which was enforceable by proceedings on indictment in the nature of a prosecution for public nuisance. Ruts, potholes or bushes rooted in the highway might make a highway out of repair but not things which obstructed the surface without damaging it. At common law, responsibility for repairing highways and keeping them in repair rested on the inhabitants at large, but the meaning of repair was confined to making good defects in the surface of the highway itself so as to make it reasonably passable without danger for ordinary traffic.Lord Denning's judgment in Haydon was a dissenting judgment but it was approved by the House of Lords in Goodes. ![]() The history and scope of the duty of highway authorities and their common law predecessors for the maintenance of highways was reviewed by Lord Denning MR in Haydon v Kent County Council QB 343 and by Lord Hoffmann in Goodes v East Sussex County Council and more shortly in Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council UKHL 15. The 1980 Act is a consolidation Act built upon centuries of highway law.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |