The ground beneath your feet and the sky above your head

17/01/2019 | JON HART

Jon Hart of award-winning law firm Pinsent Masons LLP takes a look at a recent UK Supreme Court decision on the common law definition of ‘highway’, the meaning of ‘two spits’ and what this might mean for transport authorities and developers.

Every now and again it is a good idea to challenge assumptions about familiar and well-used words. Take the name of this distinguished publication, for example: ‘Highways’. What does this mean? In a unanimous decision, handed down last month by the Supreme Court, the UK’s highest court considered this question.

The case was between two public authorities (London Borough of Southwark v Transport for London, [2018] UKSC63). Some aspects of the court’s finding may be seen as surprising – and may have ramifications not just for transport authorities but stakeholders in property development schemes beside, above or beneath highways.

First, some definitions – or lack of definitions. It is perhaps surprising that there is no single meaning of ‘highway’ in law.

One of the judges referred to the ‘rich tapestry’ of the law in this area.

Over the years, the law has had to distinguish between those who own highways, those who are required to maintain and repair highways and highways users.

These rights can change over time – for example, if I am no longer obliged to repair and maintain a road, does this mean that I no longer ‘own’ it?

Furthermore, where do my rights end? At black-top level, at drainage level, or further below? Does this mean I have rights in respect of minerals and other finds beneath the road?

Likewise, where do my rights above the highway finish? Am I allowed to erect a structure over a road – run cables for trams or build a suspended structure above it?

These kinds of questions were at the heart of the case that the court was asked to consider. Historically, cases had considered that ‘highway’ might mean ‘surface and top two spits of subsoil’ beneath the carriageway and limitations above the carriageway (what has sometimes been referred to as the ‘Baird’ principle after an old case from 1896).

These considerations were important for both Transport for London (TfL) and Southwark, given the way in which local government and the local road network had been dealt with in the legislation associated with the establishment of the Greater London Authority back in 1999.

TfL had sought clarity from the Supreme Court about the legal definition of ‘highway’ following the transfer to it of roads previously maintained by London’s borough councils.

The relevant statutory transfer arrangements provided that TfL was receiving ‘the highway, in so far as it is vested in the former highway authority’.

In simple terms, TfL had been seeking determination that the council had previously enjoyed wide rights and therefore TfL was entitled to those same wide rights, especially in relation to rights above the roads; the council argued that the rights were much narrower – and applied only to that part of the vertical plane above the road as was necessary for the operation, maintenance and repair of the highway.

Given the financial value associated with these kinds of questions, there were probably many other interested parties looking on to see what the final outcome of the case was going to be.

The Supreme Court took a careful look at this issue. They came to the conclusion that there is no one meaning of the term ‘highway’ when it comes to rights of ownership.

Instead of some of the older terminology that dated back from the 19th century, the court gave approval to what was considered as the ‘zone of ordinary use’ for a road: a more flexible concept covering various depths of subsoil and airspace height depending on the nature and intensity of the use of the road.

Accordingly, ‘highway’ could have a range of meanings, the court held: ‘When used within a statutory formula, [as was the case with the transfer to TfL], the word necessarily takes its meaning from the context in which it is used.’

Consideration focused particularly on the types of rights that local authorities might have applied in relation to affected highways. Where authorities were responsible for the maintenance and operation of highways, their rights may be more limited than, for example, where they owned property alongside the highways in question.

In the former case, the meaning of highway may be narrower following the old ‘Baird principle’. Where the authority was an owner of land adjoining the highway, then it would be more likely that they would have wider rights and entitlement, including potentially lucrative development rights above the highway itself.

So what does this all mean in practice? Certainly the flexibility approved by the Supreme Court in relation to the meaning of ‘highway’ can be seen as a good thing – one could imagine circumstances where the blanket imposition of the old Baird principle across a range of different scenarios could give rise to unforeseen outcomes.

However, this case does mean that those involved in highway matters should carefully consider how the term is being used and be alive to matters of interpretation.

For example, in matters of negotiation, taking time and trouble to ensure that all parties involved in a highway matter are using the same definition and have a shared understanding is likely to be of increased importance.

This means giving consideration to the extent of land, vertically and horizontally that is required for a highway.

Following this case, airspace and subsoil above and below the surface of the highway may well be included within a ‘zone of ordinary use’ where they may previously have been excluded from the previous definition of ‘surface and top two spits of subsoil’.

In practical terms, if there are particular sub-surface or airspace construction issues in relation to developments, these should be specifically addressed.

Additionally, in view of this case, consideration should be given as to the scope to widen the horizontal extent of the highway beyond its surface, to adjoining land, where such land is required to facilitate the ordinary use of the highway. This last point will be an important consideration for both the dedication of land as a highway and also the ‘stopping up’, or closure, of a highway.

Parties will need to ensure that only necessary land is included within the highway; and any development value in the airspace, subsoil and adjoining land around the highway is protected.

And the meaning of ‘spit’? The relevant cases and legal authorities are quite clear on this point, albeit that this may differ from interpretations in football’s Premier League. A ‘spit’, of course, is the depth of a spade.

Highways InProfile

latest magazine issue
Highways jobs

Street Lighting Project Engineer

PO2 - £41,442 to £44,331
Help us keep our streets safe, efficient and ready for the future Greenwich, London (Greater)
Recruiter: Royal Borough of Greenwich

Principal Engineer - Highways Development Management

£47,181.00 - £50,269.00, Grade 11, 37 hours, Permanent
We are seeking a dedicated Principal Highways Development Management Engineer to join our team. Wakefield, West Yorkshire
Recruiter: Wakefield Council

Highways Development Management Engineer

£32,061.00 - £46,142.00, Career Grade 7-10, 37 hours, Permanent
Do you want to join a team helping to shape the future of Wakefield through HIghways Development Management? Wakefield, West Yorkshire
Recruiter: Wakefield Council

Highways Project Engineer

£31,537 - £42,839 per annum
Would you like to be part of our friendly, welcoming Highways team, proud to manage all aspects of the highway network? Boroughbridge, York
Recruiter: North Yorkshire Council

Highways Project Engineer

£31,537 - £42,839 per annum
Would you like to be part of our friendly, welcoming Highways team, proud to manage all aspects of the highway network? Skipton, North Yorkshire
Recruiter: North Yorkshire Council

Technician - Highway Inspector

Grade 8 £29,719 - £31,691 per annum
Within the Highways Maintenance Team we are looking for an enthusiastic, customer focused and experienced person Derbyshire
Recruiter: Derbyshire County Council

Highway Design and Construction Manager

Grade N, scp50 £62,443 to scp53 £65,663 per annum, plus essential car user allowance
We embrace AI to enhance our operations and to innovate our services. Bolton, Greater Manchester
Recruiter: Bolton Council

Technician - Highway Inspector

Grade 8 £29,719 - £31,691 per annum
At Derbyshire, we have been on a journey to transform the way we deliver highway services. Derbyshire
Recruiter: Derbyshire County Council

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
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