Highway dedication
Series: Estates Gazette Case Summaries ; [2000] EGCS 137 (02/12/00)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: "Hale v Norfolk CC" CA 17 November 2000. A owned a property with a garden fronting onto a roadway, in respect of which the council (B) were the local highway authority. A erected several low posts and a chain along the edge of the garden where it met the roadway. B objected and served a notice requiring their removal, claiming that a certain part of the land had been dedicated as part of the highway. A issued proceedings claiming a declaration that the land did not form part of the highway, and seeking an order for B to replace the posts and chain. Claim dismissed. B appealed but the appeal was dismissed. The "hedge-to-hedge" presumption applied.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London News article | WB3648-30 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 109780-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: News article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
"Hale v Norfolk CC" CA 17 November 2000. A owned a property with a garden fronting onto a roadway, in respect of which the council (B) were the local highway authority. A erected several low posts and a chain along the edge of the garden where it met the roadway. B objected and served a notice requiring their removal, claiming that a certain part of the land had been dedicated as part of the highway. A issued proceedings claiming a declaration that the land did not form part of the highway, and seeking an order for B to replace the posts and chain. Claim dismissed. B appealed but the appeal was dismissed. The "hedge-to-hedge" presumption applied.