header-logo header-logo

30 November 2012 / Alec Samuels
Issue: 7540 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

On common ground

Alec Samuels examines the arguments for and against fencing common land

The common may not be fenced without the consent of the secretary of state (Commons Act 2006 (CA 2006), s 38). Other consents may be required from eg, the owner and planning authority. The prohibition covers “restricted works” which prevent or impede access, such as fencing or ditches. Resurfacing with certain material is also prohibited, except for repair/maintenance of an existing surface.

Works for the installation of electronic communications apparatus for the purposes of an electronic communications code network are permitted under s 38(b)(d) (above ground masts would require planning permission).

Land is common land if it is registered or otherwise protected, eg, under a scheme of management under the Metropolitan Commons Act 1866 or the Commons Act 1899.

The New Forest is governed by its own traditional and statutory regime, responsibility being vested in the Verderers and the New Forest National Park Authority. Ponies stray onto roads and into villages. The A31 and the A35 are busy roads traversing the New Forest,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll