Right of way - intensification/interpretation

pilman
Posts: 2882
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 4:08 pm

Re: Right of way - intensification/interpretation

Post by pilman » Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:50 pm

Several thoughts came to mind after reading that last post.

There were deeds in 1921 and 1922, which I assume you have copies of.
Those are private documents that would now have been superseded by the Land Registry register of title, which is a public document.

Depending on what is stated on the register of title for the development land, that is the only document that the Parish Council can access.

I am confused by the words used in this statement "1987: the access road fell into the ownership of the Parish Council"

How did this land fall into the ownership of the PC?

Did you own the dominant land in 2001 when the PC granted rights of way for a development for the commercial use for equestrian purposes.

The your final question seems to imply that the Parish Council are not happy about this development of houses and may want to try and prevent access for building work to go ahead.

Is that why you are posting on Garden Law. To find out if your development can be stopped by the Parish Council?

From 1926 until 2001, the right of way has been used to access land occupied by residential dwellings under a grant made in 1922.

Do the Parish Council know the exact wording used in that 1922 deed?

You also refer to a restrictive agricultural stipulation.
Was that a restrictive covenant when the land was first sold, or did it specifically identify the right of way as being for agricultural use only.

That is why I mentioned researching those sorts of facts when I posted earlier.

Advice can be offered, but only when all those facts are known about.

jonahinoz
Posts: 1479
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Re: Right of way - intensification/interpretation

Post by jonahinoz » Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:05 am

Hi,

There seems to be no expressed rights for animals to cross this land. ??? Horses? Dogs?

John W

arborlad
Posts: 7640
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Right of way - intensification/interpretation

Post by arborlad » Sun Mar 04, 2018 4:52 pm

arborlad wrote:



With multiple threads come multiple issues...........and now you've started another one!!

It's far from clear what you are asking and what you want to achieve, for example - do you wish to build 5 houses or do you wish to prevent 5 houses being built?

Do you own multiple properties with multiple issues around each one, in which case you need to find a way to differentiate one property from another.

If you only own one property, it's very much in your best interests to have all of your threads merged - and not start another one.

https://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/view ... =8&t=21141 :roll:
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Hacker
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 5:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 5
Number of topics per page: 1

Re: Right of way - intensification/interpretation

Post by Hacker » Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:54 pm

It's obvious that this is a different issue, so why merge ?

Don't you have anything better to do with your time !!!

jonahinoz
Posts: 1479
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Re: Right of way - intensification/interpretation

Post by jonahinoz » Wed Mar 07, 2018 4:24 pm

Hi,

Doesn't the phrase "connection with the operation of a stud/livery/stables/riding school" limit the number and class of people that can benefit from this right? I suppose they residents of the new houses could all become shareholders?

John W

jonahinoz
Posts: 1479
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 5:15 pm

Re: Right of way - intensification/interpretation

Post by jonahinoz » Wed Mar 07, 2018 4:32 pm

PS,

Probably OT ... a friend had the job of negotiating with land owners over laying a pipe line (oil? gas?) across their land. Part of the deal included new fences, specific to what live stock they kept. Sheep got wire mesh, cows got wire strands, horses got mesh with two strands of wire above.

As he worked his way towards Wales, he kept meeting the same old nag. It must have known he was coming. :?

"Come ... and they will build it!"

John W

Post Reply