Two couples in Formby, Merseyside, have run up a legal bill of over £100,000 after a High Court judge was forced to rule on whether gates to their shared driveway should be open or shut. The dispute between Martin and Rosemary Bradley and their neighbours Peter and Marianne Heslin culminated in a three-day hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice.
The Bradleys, who have lived in their Edwardian villa since 1986, wanted to keep the gates shut at all times for security reasons. However, the Heslins, who moved into a nearby bungalow in 2006, argued that this caused them 'serious inconvenience' as they had to stop their car and open the gates every time they entered or left their home.
Mr Justice Norris, who visited the site himself, criticised the couples for failing to resolve the matter amicably. He noted that installing remote-controlled electric gates would have cost around £5,000, a fraction of the legal fees incurred. 'Sensible neighbours would have sat round a table and worked out either a regime for closing the gates at agreed hours or the installation of remotely operated electric gates,' he said.
The judge ruled that the Bradleys own the gates but cannot keep them shut at times that 'substantially interfere' with the Heslins' enjoyment of their home. The Heslins revealed they had offered to pay for automatic gates, but no agreement was reached after a nearby burglary prompted the Bradleys to close the gates regularly.
Mr Justice Norris expressed surprise that the case had reached the High Court, stating: 'First, that anyone should pursue a neighbour dispute to trial, where even the victor is not a winner, given the blight which a contested case casts over the future of neighbourly relations. Second, that the case should have been pursued in the High Court over three days.'
