header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
30 November 2012 / Alec Samuels
Issue: 7540 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

On common ground

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll