bulletin
Are Courts prepared to consider economic restrictions placed on local authorities?
7 December 2010
Following the recent case of Ali v The City of Bradford
& Metropolitan District Council there are real suggestions
to say that they are.
In Ali, the claimant had appealed against the ruling
that her pleadings disclosed no cause of action. Ali had slipped
and fallen on steps leading to a footpath which had been covered
with mud, overgrown vegetation and rubbish. Unusually, her claim
was not that the highway was dangerous but that the condition of
the footpath had been neglected by the local authority and so she
brought her claim under Section 130 of the Highways Act 1980. This
section provides a duty upon highway authorities to protect the
rights of the public to use and enjoy the highway and also includes
the provision to remove obstructions and waste and had the court
found in her favour, would have represented an extension in the
duties owed by local authorities to members of the public.
The Court, however, found that there was no such provision to
extend the duty under Section 130 to remove general rubbish and
overgrown vegetation and that the duty, which is for the benefit of
the public in general, did not give rise to a civil action for
damages.
The claimant also alleged that the failure to remove
obstructions from the highway amounted to a nuisance. The Court
rejected this argument, finding that a local authority is not the
occupier of the land - it just has statutory duties imposed upon
it. The laws relating to the maintenance of highways and the
responsibilities of local authorities are sufficiently contained
within the Highways Act and that the concept of nuisance should not
be extended.
In reaching its decision, the court was conscious that to
require highway authorities to carry out regular precautionary
inspections of public footpaths of all descriptions to see that
they are kept free from obstructions would have substantial
economic implications for local authorities.
We are finding that the Courts are increasingly open to the
suggestion that local authorities have limited resources to perform
their functions. The Court of Appeal’s refusal to extend the duties
owed by local authorities to members of the public, which would
have imposed a significant financial burden, is welcome news during
these difficult times.
Going forward, it will be more common to put forward this type
of argument where all council departments are facing cuts.
Ali suggests that such an argument will be given serious
consideration by the Courts.
talk to us
save to PDF
The content of this bulletin is provided for the purposes of
general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries
of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive
statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does
not provide a substitute for it.