[2005] EWCA Civ 1597, 19 December 2005. Raises questions on the interpretation and application of the proviso in the Highways Act 1980 s31(1) which provides a rebuttable presumption of the dedication of a way as a highway after use of it by the public as a right and without interruption for 20 years. Appeals by G and D against a decision that they had not established a right of way over two separate areas of land. D had requested that a public footpath over a private estate be added to the district map but the tenancy agreement of the estate contained a clause that the tenant would warn and keep off all unauthorised persons from trespassing. The judge held that the proviso did not require a land owner to have taken steps to communicate the intention not to dedicate to public users of the way nor to show continuous intention not to dedicate throughout the 20-year period. "Held": appeals dismissed. The court could find that the proviso had been satisfied even if the evidence used to infer that the owner did not intend to dedicate was not overt or direct communication with users of the right of way. The owner did not have to demonstrate that he did not have the intention continuously throughout the 20-year period.