Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Alt: Reid, Q.C.; Shepherd & Wedderburn, W.S. (First and Third Respondent): Menzies, Q.C., R. Henderson (Scottish Ministers)
[1] This is an appeal at the instance of the petitioner against the refusal of the Lord Ordinary to grant interdict against the respondents and their servants and agents, or anyone on their behalf, from demanding any toll from the petitioner in respect of the Skye Bridge between Kyle of Lochalsh and Kyleakin in Inverness-shire ("the crossing") with certain ancillary demands. The Lord Ordinary rejected the claim essentially on matters of substance and principle.
"Where it is intended that the proposed Toll Order shall authorise the special road authority to assign their rights to charge and collect tolls, the Secretary of State or, as the case may be, the local road authority shall make a statement containing such information as may be prescribed with respect to that assignation and the person to whom the rights are intended to be assigned, and:-
the Order to which the Notice under sub-paragraph (1) (i.e. the Notice advertising the proposal to make a Toll Order relates); and
The terms of sub-paragraph (3) of Paragraph 14A of Schedule 1 to the 1984 Act evidently stem from the provisions of Section 28 of the 1991 Act, which include the following:-
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.