Supreme Court to hear highways case on overlapping local authority powers

A panel of five judges at the Supreme Court will later this month (23 April) hear a key highways case centring on a local authority’s overlapping powers.

The respondent in Cusack v London Borough of Harrow is a solicitor who has for many years practised out of premises in Harrow.

There is a forecourt in front of the premises which is currently used for car parking, and which itself fronts onto the A409, a stretch of single carriageway road. To use the forecourt, car drivers must mount the kerb and pass over a footway.

Harrow Council concluded that the use of the forecourt was dangerous for pedestrians and other road users, and so decided to erect barriers along the side of the road to prevent its use.

The county court and the High Court both held that Harrow was entitled to do so pursuant to s. 80 of the Highways Act 1980 under which no compensation was payable to Mr Cusack.

The Court of Appeal reversed those decisions holding that the local authority was required to use s. 66 of the 1980 Act, a narrower provision aimed at improving public safety and under which compensation was payable to Mr Cusack.

Harrow appealed to the Supreme Court, asserting that it was entitled to use either provision and ought to be able to use the most economic.

The issue before the Supreme Court therefore is whether, where there are two overlapping powers, the local authority, having regard to the financial savings, can choose which to invoke, or whether it must use the narrower and most focused provision of the two.

The hearing is scheduled to last one day. The five judges are Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath and Lord Hughes.

See: Raised voices by Clare Hardy