THE Keep Windermere Alive Campaign suffered a major blow this week when a district judge rejected its claims that the speed restriction by-law enforced on Windermere was invalid due to "legal uncertainty."

The matter came to a head at South Lakeland Magistrates Court when passionate KWA member Kevin John Furber, 51, of Fetter Lane, London, went on trial, accused of breaking the 10mph speed limit last year.

The Lake District National Park Authority imposed the Windermere Navigation Amendment bylaw in 2005 in a bid to bring tranquillity to the lake, but the move prompted significant protest from local traders and boating enthusiasts, resulting in the formation of KWA.

On July 24, 2007, Furber took to the lake with blind water-skiing champion Gerald Price to deliberately break the speed limit, in what KWA described as being the first stage in a legal battle to challenge the validity of the by-law.

Defending, Tony Child argued that Furber should be acquitted of the charge, as the by-law was "uncertain, ambiguous and confusing" and was therefore "unlawful."

Mr Child described how in one section of the by-law the speed limit on the lake was stated as being 10mph, with the metric equivalent of 16.093kmph given next to it in brackets.

He explained that by including this metric conversion, LDNPA was implying that the speed limit on the lake was measured in imperial miles.

However, in another section of the bylaw, the speed limit was given as ten nautical mph, which equates to 18.52kmph.

Mr Child drew upon a range of past cases, where the judges had dismissed charges due to uncertainty and continued: "Criminal law should be certain and no-one should be convicted on an uncertain bylaw. I can say with confidence that it is outrageous to suggest that there is no ambiguity on the face of this by-law."

Prosecuting on behalf of the LDNPA, Natalie Lieven QC also used past cases to argue the validity of the by-law and stressed that the meaning was "perfectly clear".

She explained that in the first section the speed limit was specified as 10mph and in the later section this was defined as being ten nautical miles per hour.

"There is no uncertainty, no ambiguity and no confusion. The wrong metrification figure has been put in brackets," she added.

Ms Lieven described how the incident had been a deliberate attempt to flout the speed limit and added: "This by-law has been in place for some time. It is not some innocent person who was confused."

She advised the court to exercise "textual severability", which would see the removal of the offending bracketed figure of 16.093kmph.

"To strike out those words has no effect on the overall legislative purpose," she added.

After listening to both submissions and reading the case law put forward, Mr Chalk ruled in favour of the LDNPA and said: "I am satisfied that this by-law is not invalid due to uncertainty.

"However, I do not propose to make a full judgement at this stage."

A date has not yet been set to hear the next stage of the trial, which will see the defence calling upon witnesses to question the reasonableness of the by-law, but it was agreed that Mr Child would have until May 16 to prepare his case, with the prosecution given a further two weeks to formulate its argument in respect of the chosen defence witnesses.