A MAN has won a county court battle to keep a gate across a footpath next to his home locked.

The court decided that Carl Taylor, pictured, can continue to padlock the metal gate on a path running past his home. The gate has been at the centre of a long-running rights of way dispute.

Mr Taylor was given permission to erect the 8ft gate, at his own expense, in 1993 - as long as it complied with highway authority specifications. The gate cuts across a public footpath that leads to St David's Wood. Mr Taylor, of Woodfieldside, Blackwood, began locking the gate in May 1999.

Some residents and councillors had opposed the gate, saying it was an obstruction and a danger if emergency vehicles needed to pass.

But Mr Taylor said there were provisions for bona-fide users of the footway - including a modern stile which provides special access for disabled users but not for bikes or horses.

He said the gates were locked to prevent cars and other vehicles that are not allowed on the footpath, from using it - and he had offered keys to the emergency services. Last week, Blackwood county court finally ruled that Mr Taylor can continue locking the gate.

District Judge Regan's ruling said: "The new designed stile patently allows all members of the public who legitimately wish to gain access to the path beyond the gate to do so.

"If the claimant had no authority to erect the gate and stile, he would be causing an obstruction. But here he had applied for and received an authority."

The council had argued a condition reading "the gates shall not be locked or secured at any time to the exclusion of permitted users of the highway" meant that locking the gates was prohibited.

But the judge said that if the authority had wished to prohibit locking all the time, then there was no reason to add the extra words after "time" in the condition - and that they defined that locking of the gates was anticipated at some time. He also ordered Caerphilly council to pay Mr Taylor's costs.

Mr Taylor told the Argus he was "delighted" with the ruling.

A council spokesman said the authority is considering the ruling and is yet to make any decision about any future action.