Footpaths and moving river banks
Series: Estates Gazette Case Summaries ; [2000] EGCS 150 (16/12/00)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: 2000. "R v SoS Environment ex p Gloucestershire CC and another". In July 1996 A made an extinguishment order in respect of a footpath, as a substantial section of it had disappeared into the river. A sought confirmation of the order from the SoS. Objections were made and an inquiry held. At the inquiry A contended the footpath was not needed. The objectors countered that there was sufficient use to justify the path's retention, and the right of way could move as the river moved. The Inspector found that the path should move with the river bank, and that the public right of way continued to exist. He refused to confirm the order. A sought to quash the decision on the ground that the Inspector erred in his approach to the right to deviate. The decision was remitted to the SoS for his reconsideration.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London News article | WB3701-03 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 110073-1001 |
2000. "R v SoS Environment ex p Gloucestershire CC and another". In July 1996 A made an extinguishment order in respect of a footpath, as a substantial section of it had disappeared into the river. A sought confirmation of the order from the SoS. Objections were made and an inquiry held. At the inquiry A contended the footpath was not needed. The objectors countered that there was sufficient use to justify the path's retention, and the right of way could move as the river moved. The Inspector found that the path should move with the river bank, and that the public right of way continued to exist. He refused to confirm the order. A sought to quash the decision on the ground that the Inspector erred in his approach to the right to deviate. The decision was remitted to the SoS for his reconsideration.