Section 3
Rights over highways
J.D.C. Harte, Barrister, Lecturer in Law
Public concern over conservation in the countryside has been reflected in a number of
statutory regimes. Although their provisions are sometimes in harmony with the interests
of recreational users of rights of way, they are not always. Even modest recreational use
may endanger delicate plant species, for example, and conflict may be particularly
difficult to resolve where the aspect of the site which merits protection also makes it
attractive as a route for recreational access. Conservation legislation generally seems to
lack any comprehensive machinery for reconciling public access interests with conservation
interests.
Alistair Speirs, LL.B., Lecturer in law, Newcastle
A wide ranging review of the classification of highways, including special reference
to the classes shown in the definitive maps.
Alex Lewis LLB, Solicitor (non-practising)
This article reviews the development of the law relating to rights of way
for cyclists and considers whether highway authorities need further powers to improve the
network for cyclists
Bruce Monnington, B.A.(Hons), M.A., Barrister
The rights of way of cyclists are examined, first by considering what rights of way
cyclists enjoy, and then looking at how these may be acquired. It will be seen that
cyclists do not fit easily into the strictures of the traditional threefold classification
of public rights of way at common law.
Martin Fargher, B.Sc., C.Eng., MICE, MCIT.
Many of the provisions needed to improve and increase cycling in urban and rural areas
could be achieved, with a change of policy, by requiring highway authorities to encourage
transport by cycle, and by requiring planning authorities to provide good cycle access.
However, other provisions would require changes in law which would be more controversial,
such as abolishing the right to plough cross-field footpaths and bridleways, or the duty
to provide all weather cycle surfaces over bridleways, which are at the same time suitable
for use by horses.
The problems are numerous but not all insuperable, and if solved could greatly encourage
the use of cycles, which in turn, it is argued, would improve the environment.
Peter Carty, LL.M., Partner, Simon Jackson, Solicitors
Mark Heath, has stated that the case of R. v. Mathias is not authority for the
proposition that there is a right to take dogs on footpaths: "In the meantime, if
someone tries to argue that the Mathias case is an authority that a dog is a usual
accompaniment, tell them that they are wrong". In contrast, Garner and Jones have
argued that the case is authority for the point that the use of a footpath does not
prevent passage with the "usual accompaniment" of a walker. The rule that it is
permissible to push a perambulator along a footpath would clearly cover accompaniment by a
dog. Two views directly opposed but who is right? This article will examine the case law
to see if it sheds any light on the problem.
Mike Harwood, B.A., LL.B (Cantab), Solicitor
The Governments ‘Equality Statement’ published in November 1999 stated:
”Changing negative attitudes towards disability ... is crucially
important.
We shall continue with our campaign to address the lack of
knowledge
of disability issues ... We intend to combat discrimination
across a
broad front, using both legislative and non-legislative
measures as
appropriate, and with the public sector taking the
lead”.
This article reviews the legal principles which affect the disabled (more particularly
those with mobility problems) in accessing the countryside along public paths; and draws
attention to some of the legal issues.
3.3: Private rights
Colin Sydenham, Barrister
The interrelationship of public and private rights of way is a little explored and
little understood corner of property law. But with the growth of interest in public rights
of way, fostered by organisations dedicated to exploiting them, it is an area which is
attracting more attention. This article addresses several specific questions on which
landowners need to be advised with increasing frequency. When can they claim a greater
right than the public, such as a right of passage for vehicles, over a minor highway; and
can they ever lawfully maintain such a highway to a standard appropriate for their private
vehicular use? What happens to their private right if the public right is terminated? Two
abbreviations will be used: "HA 1980" for the Highways Act 1980, and
"LHA" for Local Highway Authority. Special categories of public way (eg RUPPs
and BOATs) will be left out of account.
|
|