
Print Options
PrintThe Whole
Act
PrintThe Whole
Part
PrintThe Whole
Cross Heading
PrintThis
Section
only
Changes over time for: Section 58


Llinell Amser Newidiadau
This timeline shows the different points in time where a change occurred. The dates will coincide with the earliest date on which the change (e.g an insertion, a repeal or a substitution) that was applied came into force. The first date in the timeline will usually be the earliest date when the provision came into force. In some cases the first date is 01/02/1991 (or for Northern Ireland legislation 01/01/2006). This date is our basedate. No versions before this date are available. For further information see the Editorial Practice Guide and Glossary under Help.
Status:
Point in time view as at 04/11/2022.
Changes to legislation:
Highways Act 1980, Section 58 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 04 March 2025. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations.

Changes to Legislation
Changes and effects yet to be applied by the editorial team are only applicable when viewing the latest version or prospective version of legislation. They are therefore not accessible when viewing legislation as at a specific point in time. To view the ‘Changes to Legislation’ information for this provision return to the latest version view using the options provided in the ‘What Version’ box above.
58 Special defence in action against a highway authority for damages for non-repair of highway.E+W
(1)In an action against a highway authority in respect of damage resulting from their failure to maintain a highway maintainable at the public expense it is a defence (without prejudice to any other defence or the application of the law relating to contributory negligence) to prove that the authority had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to secure that the part of the highway to which the action relates was not dangerous for traffic.
(2)For the purposes of a defence under subsection (1) above, the court shall in particular have regard to the following matters:—
(a)the character of the highway, and the traffic which was reasonably to be expected to use it;
(b)the standard of maintenance appropriate for a highway of that character and used by such traffic;
(c)the state of repair in which a reasonable person would have expected to find the highway;
(d)whether the highway authority knew, or could reasonably have been expected to know, that the condition of the part of the highway to which the action relates was likely to cause danger to users of the highway;
(e)where the highway authority could not reasonably have been expected to repair that part of the highway before the cause of action arose, what warning notices of its condition had been displayed;
but for the purposes of such a defence it is not relevant to prove that the highway authority had arranged for a competent person to carry out or supervise the maintenance of the part of the highway to which the action relates unless it is also proved that the authority had given him proper instructions with regard to the maintenance of the highway and that he had carried out the instructions.
(3)This section binds the Crown.
(4). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Textual Amendments
Modifications etc. (not altering text)
Yn ôl i’r brig