I did not give up the fight, Atticus and Lurker. I made an application to apply for judicial review of the Inspector’s decision.
Permission was refused on the papers at the High Court and refused at an oral renewal of the application for permission, by Mr Justice Dove on 12.11.2015, even though he did not identify and address all of the grounds for appeal and made flagrant errors of law.
Lord Justice Gross said the grounds were all dealt with by Dove J, despite the evidence of the transcript showing that they were not considered by Dove J in his judgment. “Totally without merit” certificate wrongly applied by judge 8th April 2016 and received on 22nd.
(1) Dove J in directing himself that the definitive map route exiting from Glebe Yard over adjacent land, was capable of being a public highway, misdirected himself in law; and
(2) Dove J disregarded the rule of law ‘once a highway, always a highway’, as once a highway over Glebe land has been dedicated by the owner of the land, to use by the public as of right as a through route, as recorded in the definitive statement, the public's right of way cannot be lost by disuse.
Dove J and the inspector confused two issues, the essential characteristics of a highway, and the undisputed evidence of the intention by the owner of Glebe Yard to dedicate a right of way over glebe land between public roads at each end. In order for a way to be deemed to have become dedicated as a public right of way by right of long use, the route has to be of such a character that its use could give rise at common law to a presumption of dedication. This means that the route must be clearly identifiable, as there is no generally applicable right to roam over private land.
Misdirection under section 53(3)(c)(iii) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981:
The Definitive Map route over glebe land from Kimber Road to Glebe Yard, but then exiting over adjacent land onto Queen Street does not constitute a way over land which could give rise to a presumption of dedication at common law. Such use to stray and meander over adjacent land as a substituted means of public exit from Glebe Yard to Queen Street, is clearly not capable of giving rise to a public right of way.
Misdirection under section 53(3)(c)(i) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981:
The Definitive Statement route over glebe land from Kimber Road to Glebe Yard debouching into Station Road does constitute a way over land which gives rise to a presumption of dedication at common law.
Would anyone like to discuss the obfuscation by the judiciary and the misapplication of the law?
Links for anyone still interested and would like to read any of the documents:
Inspector’s decision: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/. ... _14a_4.pdf
Grounds advanced 04.11.2015 before Dove J, but not all considered by him in his judgmenthttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1Rp3 ... sp=sharing
Transcript Dove proceedingshttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxFNae ... sp=sharing
Transcript Dove Judgmenthttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxFNae ... sp=sharing
Court of Appeal Order 08.04.2016https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxFNae ... sp=sharing