Post by Madhatter on Feb 19, 2010 12:25:48 GMT
There has been a landmark public footpath ruling that could affect every farmer and council in the country.
I think its very sad that it has come to an us and them situation. Yes public rights of way shouldn't be blocked but to force someone to remove a gate that marks a boundary to their land is really unnecessary in my opinion.
www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2010/02/17/walker-wins-landmark-footpath-victory-after-six-year-battle
A determined walkers’ champion has won a six-year legal battle to have gates removed from a path at a Somerset mansion.
In a High Court judgement, Justice Cranston ruled that gates across Barcroft Lane at the £3.8m Barcroft Hall at South Petherton must be removed. The case was brought by campaigner Peter Kidner, backed by the Open Spaces Society.
The outcome was described by OSS general secretary Kate Ashbrook as a landmark ruling with wider significance for footpath campaigners.
Barcroft Hall owner Brian Herrick erected the gates after buying the property in 2001.
Following a 2006 case in which he was found guilty of obstructing a public right of way, Mr Herrick unlocked the gates, but Mr Kidner launched a legal action to force Somerset County Council to act to have the unlawful obstruction removed.
Magistrates backed Mr Kidner, and at a subsequent Crown Court hearing, Mr Herrick won a partial victory when the court ruled that the gates and the middle pillar be removed, but that the outer pillars and flywalls could remain.
Unsatisfied, Mr Herrick appealed the decision, but today, High Court judge Mr Justice Cranston dismissed the appeal. The county council must now enforce the removal of the gates in their entirety.
Mr Kidner’s case was to prove the gates ‘significantly interfered with the exercise of public rights of way over that way’. For some time they were locked but, he said, even when they were open, they were a psychological barrier to the public.
Turning down Mr Herrick’s appeal, the judge said: “in my judgement the public is entitled to use and to enjoy everything which is in law part of a footpath.
“The Barcroft Hall gateway prevented public passage and the enjoyment of amenity rights over [the] footpath.
“There is no reason to confine interference to physical interference. An object can get in the way of the right of passage or other amenity rights because of its psychological impact.”
Kate Ashbrook said: “This is a landmark ruling. It shows that the whole width of the public highway must be available for public use. No longer can landowners and occupiers get away with filching parts of the highway; the highway authority has a legal duty to protect the public’s rights over the whole highway.’
I think its very sad that it has come to an us and them situation. Yes public rights of way shouldn't be blocked but to force someone to remove a gate that marks a boundary to their land is really unnecessary in my opinion.
www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2010/02/17/walker-wins-landmark-footpath-victory-after-six-year-battle
A determined walkers’ champion has won a six-year legal battle to have gates removed from a path at a Somerset mansion.
In a High Court judgement, Justice Cranston ruled that gates across Barcroft Lane at the £3.8m Barcroft Hall at South Petherton must be removed. The case was brought by campaigner Peter Kidner, backed by the Open Spaces Society.
The outcome was described by OSS general secretary Kate Ashbrook as a landmark ruling with wider significance for footpath campaigners.
Barcroft Hall owner Brian Herrick erected the gates after buying the property in 2001.
Following a 2006 case in which he was found guilty of obstructing a public right of way, Mr Herrick unlocked the gates, but Mr Kidner launched a legal action to force Somerset County Council to act to have the unlawful obstruction removed.
Magistrates backed Mr Kidner, and at a subsequent Crown Court hearing, Mr Herrick won a partial victory when the court ruled that the gates and the middle pillar be removed, but that the outer pillars and flywalls could remain.
Unsatisfied, Mr Herrick appealed the decision, but today, High Court judge Mr Justice Cranston dismissed the appeal. The county council must now enforce the removal of the gates in their entirety.
Mr Kidner’s case was to prove the gates ‘significantly interfered with the exercise of public rights of way over that way’. For some time they were locked but, he said, even when they were open, they were a psychological barrier to the public.
Turning down Mr Herrick’s appeal, the judge said: “in my judgement the public is entitled to use and to enjoy everything which is in law part of a footpath.
“The Barcroft Hall gateway prevented public passage and the enjoyment of amenity rights over [the] footpath.
“There is no reason to confine interference to physical interference. An object can get in the way of the right of passage or other amenity rights because of its psychological impact.”
Kate Ashbrook said: “This is a landmark ruling. It shows that the whole width of the public highway must be available for public use. No longer can landowners and occupiers get away with filching parts of the highway; the highway authority has a legal duty to protect the public’s rights over the whole highway.’
