The legal test of how wide a right-of-way needs to be if it is a foot access, is actually the width of a wheelbarrow! That would allow bins etc to go down the right-of-way.
For the right-of-way to be obstructed, the obstruction needs to be substantial. There is no definition of substantial.
For example, a wheelie bin (or a pot) in a narrow alleyway would be a substantial obstacle but not on a driveway 18 feet wide.
A solicitors letter threatening a court application and costs, for an injunction to making keep the path clear may do the trick without the necessity of actually going to court.
It is not a matter for the Environmental Health Department.
Can I clarify anything else for you?
Please don’t forget to rate the service positive. It’s an important part of the process by which experts get paid. It doesn’t cost you anything but helps me greatly.
I agree but that’s the test.
However you have to read that in conjunction with the area over which you have the right-of-way. If it’s quite a large area shaded in a colour on the land Registry plan, it then comes down to whether the obstruction is substantial.
I think there is an issue here with the square corners and he would then face a claim in negligence or breach of his statutory requirements to keep law for visitors (and unlawful visitors for that matter) safe from harm if any claimant who was injured by the pots could prove to the court that they presented a hazard or a trap.
Unfortunately, whilst it might say the photograph has attached, it hasn’t come out at my end.
Obviously, the tables are not an issue here unless they obstruct your right-of-way.
I am familiar with the kind of layout, where there is access through everyone’s backyard.
If you want to use something else rather than the wheelbarrow then use the old-fashioned type child’s pram as a reference or simply refer to the width of the front door of a normal house which is normally 32 inches, 2’8” as being a reasonable width.
That is very kind. Thank you.