Jubilant villagers cheered as council workers ended a bitter six-year legal battle over a disputed bridleway by tearing down gates a homeowner had used to block the route.

David Moore, 63, and his wife Dawn, 59, had spent £325,000 taking their case all the way to the High Court insisting the public pathway didn’t run by their ‘multi-million pound’ home.

They have even announced they plan to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights on the grounds that their rights to their home have been breached - potentially pushing their total costs to around £400,000.

But county council employees turned up at their property in Little Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire, on Monday to remove the barriers after they ignored a formal notice to reopen the bridleway to locals, ramblers and horse riders.

The workers, some wearing high-visibility jackets, moved onto the premises and began dismantling three gates and tearing out thick brambles that had been allowed to grow in places.

An ambulance was called twice as Mr Moore said his wife, a cancer specialist who works under the name Dr Dawn Carnell, was apparently taken ill over the enforcement action but it continued after respectful workers stopped temporarily each time.

At one point, Mr Moore marched towards onlookers who cheered as they filmed proceedings, with one telling him: ‘I’m cheering because the bridleway is now open.’

Mr Moore, who runs an oncology business with his wife, said angrily: ‘Oh. Open at the expense of my wife collapsing, yeah? You happy with that?’

But parish council chairman Wayne Morris told the Mail: ‘After nearly six-and-a-half years, we are pleased that it has finally been resolved and that the village has its bridlepath reopened.

‘A huge amount of time and money has been wasted on something that was known from the beginning - money that the county council should not have been forced to spend to defend on matters that have continuously been proven.

‘The fact that Mrs Moore’s health has suffered because the bridleway is now opened is a direct consequence of their own actions and continuous refusal to acknowledge the truth.

‘The Moores had little considerations for the health and wellbeing for those neighbours who had been through a highly stressful series of court cases to get to this position.’

Another local, who asked not to be named, added: ‘I have no sympathy [for them]. It’s been six years that people have been deprived of being able to walk down there.

‘They didn’t care when neighbours had to walk their horses through busy roads in the dead of winter or think about the impact on the health of neighbours.’

The long-running dispute involves six-bedroom Breach House, parts of which date back to the 17th century, which the Moores bought for £1.2million in 2015 before spending a small fortune renovating the dilapidated property.

In 2019, furious locals later discovered the public right of way which they said had run through the 1.75-acre grounds for at least 100 years was closed off with signs and locked gates – with the Moores claiming the bridleway actually ran between two nearby cottages.

Hertfordshire County Council became involved and passed an order stating the bridleway did run through the couple's land, leading the Moores to take their case to the Planning Inspectorate.

During a four-day hearing, senior definitive map officer Gavin Harbour-Cooper revealed the council investigated the matter in 1956 and concluded the path ran through Breach House.

But when the first ‘Definitive Map’ was drawn up three years later, it showed the ‘wrong route’ between the cottages, although the Definitive Statement gave the correct information.

Nigel Adams, the founder of online estate agents BigBlackHen.com and whose parents owned Breach House from 1973 to 1985, said he handled the sale of the property to Mr Moore and his wife in 2015.

He added: ‘During this process, I repeatedly discussed with the Moores the existing bridleway and its route through the Breach House land.’

William Marques, who lived in the house in the 1960s, also recalled the bridleway passing through it.

He described how he used it to get to his grandparents’ home because the only other route, by road, was ‘too dangerous’.

But Mr Moore told the inquiry the council had admitted in 2020 the bridleway signs by his home were wrong, so they were removed.

He insisted: ‘When I purchased the property, I was not made aware of the existence of a bridleway crossing the property.’

When the planning inspector ruled against the Moores, they went to the High Court where the judge again backed the villagers and noted the ‘inherent implausibility to the Claimants’ argument’.

They were refused the right to go to the Court of Appeal last year, leading to the current sabre-rattling about the ECHR.

In an interview last month, Mr Moore said he was putting the county council on notice that he would be 'pursuing the Article 8 human rights argument and also Article 1, Schedule 1 of the ECHR'.

He added: 'This all revolves around the decision to change my defined 2015 purchase parameter, as now enshrined in the High Court.

'You are entitled to what you purchased after carrying out all due diligence.'

Discussing the six-figure sum he and his wife had ploughed into their unsuccessful legal battle, Mr Moore told the Mail earlier this year: ‘The cost doesn’t really come into it at this point in time. It’s whether you think you’re right or wrong.’

He added his wife supported him ‘100 per cent’ in the ongoing legal battle as both believe the council is at fault for providing inaccurate documents when they bought their home.

‘This is not me going off on some expedition into the wilderness and putting my tin hat on and saying “Whatever happens, happens”,’ he said.

‘This is two logical people looking at the position given in 2015 and knowing they’re correct.’

The bad blood the dispute has caused in the community saw Mr Moore – whose wife works at University College Hospital in London – complaining of criminal damage, including scratches on his cars, and harassment.

Meanwhile, the owners of the two neighbouring cottages - including Mr Morris - ploughed tens of thousands into their own legal costs.

A spokesman for Hertfordshire County Council said: ‘Contractors working for our Countryside and Rights of Way service have today attended a site in Little Berkhamsted to remove obstructions from a bridleway so that the public are able to freely use the route.

‘We are required by law to ensure that public rights of way are freely usable by the public, as are the owners of land crossed by rights of way.

‘In this case we served the landowner with a formal notice making it clear what their legal obligations are and requiring them to remove obstructions on the bridleway.

‘Unfortunately, the obstructions have remained in place and we have had to use our enforcement powers to physically remove the obstructions.’ 

The Moores were approached for a comment.