crfishwick wrote:
It will eventually be tested in a Scottish court. As for the Wicklaw Way incident a different country and laws. BTW She won initially and was only overturned on appeal! Next time a different outcome?
Landowners are very wary nowadays about litigation. Or are you suggesting they took it down to curtail walkers? Cannot be so as the estate is replacing it eventually in 2018 thankfully.
PC Brigade. Nonsense.
Interesting thoughts.
I would like to think the Scottish courts would take a similar view to the Irish who I think got it right in the end.
They definitely are curtailing walkers by removing the bridge whether that is the intention or not.
I wonder if their legal position would be worse if walkers got in to trouble trying to ford the river when the delapitated bridge may have been a much safer option if it was still there.
They obviously knew for many years the bridge needed repaired or replaced so if the intention has always been to do this why the delay?
Whatever way you look at it the estate is restricting access.
Like I already said maybe the bridge was very unsafe and giving a walker the option to assess the river was the safer option which is fair enough.