Dangerous Idiot Shooting Pigeons

[Alsone 789]

Cookie, I think what you're trying to get at is was the footpath an official footpath, entered on a map and recognised by the Rights of Way authority, rather than one which has "always been used" as a footpath by those who know about it.

 

If the path is not official, it has no bearing in law and anyone without permission in England and Wales would commit the civil offence of trespass. It would also mean that you would not need to allow anyone to pass without hindrance or cease your activity as they have no "right" to be there in the first place.

 

Though common sense should apply in all situations, legally binding or not

 

Ahh, I understand, but equally maps don't reveal everything though.

 

If you allow people to cross your land for a period exceeding 20 years without challenge, then it becomes a legal Right of Way and you lose the right to close it off or deny access.

 

Without challenge is probably open to interpretation (I havn't seen any case law in this area so wouldn' t know if or how the definition has evolved), but I would imagine to challenge the passage of people you'd have to erect fences, lock gates and erect notices as a mere verbal warning may not suffice especially as some people may never get seen or challenged.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Alsone

[SportingShooter 0]

But then if that period of time passes, it becomes a right of way and will appear on maps and be logged as an official route, providing that is a challenge is brought because otherwise, no one would know it was a right of way other than those who have used it for over 20 years.

 

To have a legal bearing, it must still be officially recognised. I can't see any court taking on a case regarding shooting rights/hindrance of walkers without the right of way actually being official.

[Alsone 789]

Not wanting to be argumentative, but imagine there are a lot of rights of way not on maps.

 

eg Our local church was advised to lock its driveway gates once a year as the footpath to the church is used as a local footpath by local people and encompasses the church's private footpath at one side and the driveway at the other. Its an accepted "right of way" by local people as they use it throughout the year, and although it isn't technically a right of way because the church does lock the gate one day a year to prevent access and maintain it as private rather than a true right of way, if they hadn't done this, I doubt it would ever have appeared on any map as a right of way once the 20 years as passed as it only exists through local knowledge of usage and the so called path is actually the church's footpath and driveway and not a separate footpath.

 

I think therefore its going to be a question of whether or not a right has ever been challenged or officially notified.

 

There are quite a few footpaths across fields in my area that aren't demarked on the ground in any way. Official? Who knows other than to say their usage goes unchallenged.

 

It is a tricky area where they can exist by usage alone.

[SportingShooter 0]

I understand what you're saying Alsone about some rights of way not being "official" and only known about through local knowledge but the point I was raising was that for any case to be brought about from a legal perspective then the footpath would have to be one which a member of the general public genuinely has the "right" to pass and re-pass.

 

The only such paths with a "right" to pass are those that are officially recognised and recorded, otherwise how can they have a legal bearing. If it means that due to proceedings lodged against say a landowner for undue hindrance to walkers that it was proved to be a path used without challenge for the statutory period then that becomes an official footpath with a genuine "right" and can then be challenged.

 

I could count dozens and dozens of paths around here that exist purely by local knowledge which I've been using for more than twenty years myself, I know they do not exist on a map or logged as an official right of way, but if it came to the point where the land changed hands with the new owners trying to prevent me from passing then first of all I would have to prove it had been used for over 20 years to stand a chance at challenging the hindrance.

 

I'm/You're not being argumentative at all, I enjoy a good debate down to the finer points. It stimulates the grey cells.