Significant legal finding on 'maintainable at public expense'

15/07/2019 | DOMINIC BROWNE

A successful High Court appeal in a highways claim against Wigan Council has established an important point in case law - that if a highway authority built a highway, it counts as a 'highway maintainable at public expense' regardless of when or why it was built or designated a highway.

Facts of the case - Barlow v Wigan Council

Mrs Barlow was walking on a metalled path through a public park owned by the council in Abram, Wigan.

She tripped and fell on a tree root growing through the path.

The preceding trial judge determined that it was a dangerous defect, but did not accept it was a 'highway maintainable at public expense' and so the duty to maintain under Highways Act 1980 s.36(2)(a) did not apply.

This finding was overruled on appeal. The Appeal Judge Mr Justice Waksman said: 'As it appears to be common ground that if s36 (2) (a) applies, there has been a failure to maintain it would follow that Ms Barlow must succeed on liability. The case then needs be remitted only on the question of contributory negligence and quantum.'

The law:

Under Highways Act 1980 s.36(2) (a) it states:

'The following highways... shall for the purposes of this Act be highways maintainable at the public expense—

(a) a highway constructed by a highway authority, otherwise than on behalf of some other person who is not a highway authority.'

The council argued that:

1) the path was constructed by Abram UDC (a long time ago) and while it was a highway authority, it did not construct the path wearing their highway authority 'hat' but rather its 'parks' or some other hat, and so was not performing the function of highway authority;

2) regardless of which hat it was wearing, there was no intention to dedicate it as a highway and so it cannot have been a highway constructed by a highway authority;

3) even if it was a highway constructed by a highway authority, the 1980 Act only applies to highways constructed after 1980, otherwise it is retrospective and that cannot be right.

The judge found against each of these points.

1 The wrong hat argument

It is not a defence to argue that the authority was not exercising its highway function when it constructed the highway but was using some other 'hat' - its parks function for instance.

The Judge agreed with the concept of a council being a 'single body corporate'. If it has a highway authority function, it is a highway authority constructing the highway regardless of the 'hat' that it is wearing, when it builds a highway.

Justice Waksman found: 'Any investigation into the particular 'hat' which the local authority was wearing at the time seems to me to be susceptible to uncertainty and arbitrariness insofar as the result may depend on which particular department was handling that particular matter. In my judgment, one should take the usual approach which is to identify the relevant legal entity and not attempt to look behind it.

'I (thus) remain of the view that, provided the relevant local authority at the time was, among other things, a highway authority, then that is sufficient for its construction of the way to attract the operation of s36 (2) (a). I can see no reason of language or logic for an additional "capacity" requirement.'

2 The unintended highway argument

The path was a highway as a result of the statutory presumption of dedication after 20 years uninterrupted use, and not because of a dedication by the highway authority.

The Appeal Judge found: 'There is no reason in statutory language, principle or case-law, why the Path here cannot fall under s36 (2) (a) because it only became a highway after long usage and was not constructed as such at the outset'.

's36 (2) (a) does not require any proof of intent to create (or dedicate) a highway at the time of the construction of the Path; it is enough that (a) the Path was constructed, (b) that at the relevant time (ie at the time of the accident), it had become a highway and (c) that it had been constructed by a highway authority, not now in dispute.'

Justice Waksman added that another problem with the argument was that 'if a highway authority created a relevant public way but did not dedicate it as a highway for, say, 6 months, it would fall outside of s36 (2) (a)'.

This would create a highway that was not maintainable at public expense and in respect of which no duty of care was owed, and would be an 'odd result'.

3) The retrospective application of the law argument

The judge noted that this is not 'an example of true retrospectivity where, for example, an event which has already taken place, lawful at the time, is now deemed to be unlawful'.

'The fact that the highway itself may have been constructed at an earlier stage does not amount to the imposition of a retrospective liability.'

The judge also noted that under the Highways Act 1980 'there is no express limitation within s36(2) (a) to highways created after the commencement of the Act', and 'nor is there any basis for implying such a limitation'.

Rather from 1980 highway authorities acquired a new duty, for the future only, to maintain highways constructed by highway authorities, whenever they were constructed.

Wigan Council was approached for comment.

Highways InProfile

latest magazine issue
Highways jobs

Team Leader (Maintenance Operations)

Grade 10 - £48,226 - £51,356
Cardiff is growing faster than any other capital city in Europe. Cardiff (Caerdydd)
Recruiter: Cardiff Council

Highways Supervisor

£Competitive
We have a fantastic opportunity for a permanent Highways Supervisor Forfar, Angus
Recruiter: Amey

Tree Surveyor

£Competitive
We are excited to offer fantastic opportunities for Permanent Tree Surveyors Scotland
Recruiter: Amey

Chief Operating Officer – South West Wales Corporate Joint Committee

£Competitive
We’re looking for a bold, visionary leader to take on the role of Chief Operating Officer Carmarthenshire (Sir Gaerfyrddin)
Recruiter: Carmarthenshire County Council

Clerk of Works - Highways

£Competitive
We have a fantastic opportunity for a Clerk of Works to join our dynamic NMC SW Account team at Polmadie. Glasgow, Glasgow City
Recruiter: Amey

Highways Supervisor

£Competitive
We have a fantastic opportunity for a permanent Highways Supervisor to join our NMC NE account in Kinross. Perth and Kinross
Recruiter: Amey

Planner - Highways

£Competitive
We have a fantastic opportunity for Permanent Planner – Highways to join our NMC SW Account. Glasgow City
Recruiter: Amey

Highways Maintenance Manager

£51,356 - £55,539 per annum
We are looking for an experienced Engineer to join the team as a Highways Maintenance Manager Selby, North Yorkshire
Recruiter: North Yorkshire Council

Highways Maintenance Manager

£51,356- £55,539 per annum
We are looking for an experienced Engineer to join the team as a Highways Maintenance Manager Brompton on Swale, Richmond
Recruiter: North Yorkshire Council

Permit Officer - Internal works promoter - WMF2244e

£34,434 - £35,412
The streetworks Permit Officer role within the highways service Kendal, Cumbria
Recruiter: Westmorland and Furness Council

Highways Development Management Engineer

£41,816 - £45,175
You will be based in the Highways Development Team and work closely with colleagues across the wider transport service. Northamptonshire
Recruiter: West Northamptonshire Council

Transport Project Officer

£34,203 - £37,067
We are seeking an enthusiastic and motivated project officer to work in our Highways and Transport Service. Northamptonshire
Recruiter: West Northamptonshire Council

Engineer - Structures

£40,777 - £44,075
Join the successful Structures team, and become a vital team member Broad Lane Office, Yate
Recruiter: South Gloucestershire Council

Assistant Traffic Management Technician - WMF2251e

£26,403 - £26,824
Westmorland and Furness Council is seeking an organised and enthusiastic individual Kendal, Cumbria
Recruiter: Westmorland and Furness Council

Senior Traffic Management Technician WMF2256e

£34,434 to £35,412 (pay award pending)
Westmorland and Furness Council is looking for three experienced and motivated individuals Cumbria / Various
Recruiter: Westmorland and Furness Council

Senior Bridge Technician - WMF2257e

£34,434 - £35,412
We are currently seeking to recruit a Senior Bridge Technician to join our Bridges and Structures team. Penrith, Cumbria
Recruiter: Westmorland and Furness Council

Highways Network Officer WMF2263e

£38,220 - £39,152
In this role, you will assist in leading the South Lakes Area Highways team Kendal, Cumbria
Recruiter: Westmorland and Furness Council

Traffic Management Technician - WMF2240e

£28,598 - £29,540
Westmorland and Furness Council is seeking a committed and technically capable individual to join our Traffic Management Team Kendal, Cumbria
Recruiter: Westmorland and Furness Council

Structures Inspector

£Competitive
We are excited to offer a fantastic opportunity for two Permanent Structure Inspectors to join our dynamic SBIM team Bristol
Recruiter: Amey

Highways Maintenance Operative

£Competitive
We have fantastic opportunities for a permanent Highways Maintenance Operatives Kettering, Northamptonshire
Recruiter: Amey
SUBSCRIBE NOW

Latest Video

Subscribe to Highways today to ensure you keep your finger on the pulse of everything happening in the UK road network throughout the year.

SUBSCRIBE NOW