Highways—maintenance, adoption and works agreements

Meaning of ‘highway’

A highway is a way (ie a defined route, such as a road, bridleway or footpath) over which the public have the right to pass and re-pass. The terms ‘highway’ and ‘public right of way’ are often used interchangeably, although the term ‘highway’ is more commonly used to describe the physical route rather than the right itself. For example, a way used by motor vehicles would usually be called a ‘highway’ rather than a ‘right of way’.

There are three main categories of highway:

  1. a carriageway, including a byway open to all traffic (for use on foot, horse, cycle, motorised and non-motorised vehicles)

  2. a bridleway (for use on foot, horse and cycle), and

  3. a footpath (for use on foot and mobility vehicles)

See Practice Notes: Highways—ownership and creation—Meaning of ‘highway’ and Definition and classification of highways.

Ownership of highway

Several interests can exist in the same piece of highway land. Highway land may belong the highway authority or a private owner. The identity of the highway authority depends on the nature of the road:

  1. the Secretary

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Planning News

High Court gives guidance on the new duty to ‘seek to further the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty’ of AONB for planning authorities (CPRE Kent v SSHCLG)

Planning analysis: Section 85(A1) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CRWA 2000) came into effect on 26 December 2023 following amendments to that Act made by section 245 of the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Act 2023 (LURA 2023). The provision requires relevant authorities to ‘seek to further the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty’ of Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (‘AONB’) when exercising functions affecting such land. This case concerned a challenge to the November 2024 decision of the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (‘the Secretary of State’) to grant planning permission for the construction of 165 dwellings and associated works in the High Weald AONB. The grounds of challenge were that the Secretary of State had breached the CRWA 2000, s 85(A1) duty (Ground 1) or alternatively, had given inadequate reasons for concluding that the duty had been complied with (Ground 2). The main issue for the High Court was whether the words ‘seek to further’ contained in the amended section 85(A1) duty had altered the substance of the duty so as to require a decision-maker to refuse planning permission for development if it is found that the proposal would cause harm to an AONB by failing to conserve or enhance its natural beauty. In dismissing the claim and upholding the Secretary of State’s decision, the judge provided guidance on the requirements of the CRWA 2000, s 85(A1) duty in the context of planning decisions affecting AONBs. Written by Max Millington, barrister at Cornerstone Barristers.

View Planning by content type :

Popular documents