Agenda and minutes

(1)       The Panel Members visited the application site prior to the meeting.  This visit was also attended by Mr T Prater (Local Member), some 15 local residents, the landowner, Mr G Forge and his representative, Mr R Stevenson.

(2)       The Commons Registration Officer introduced the application which had been made under section 15 of the Commons Act 2006.  She confirmed that all the required consultation arrangements had been complied with before explaining that the original application had been amended by the applicant to exclude the areas owned by the MoD. The revised application area was shown on the map at Appendix C to the report.

(3)       The Commons Registration Officer then said that 13 letters of support for the application had been received following consultation, together with 25 standard response form letters.  Further support had been received from Shepway DC and Sandgate PC as well as Mr Prater, the Local Member.

(4)       The Commons Registration Officer then set out the grounds for objection received from John Bishop Associates on behalf of Mr G Forge, the landowner.  These were that the user evidence was insufficient to show that the land had been used by a significant number of residents of the locality; that use had been restricted to the Public Footpaths that crossed the application site; that parts of the land had been inaccessible to the public during all or part of the qualifying period; that prohibitive notices put up by the MoD rendered use of the site contentious; and that Military Byelaws provided a right of access for the public at large, rendering use of the site “by right” rather than “as of right.”

(5)       The Commons Registration Officer then explained that the task for the Panel was to consider whether it could be shown that a significant number of the residents of a locality or of any neighbourhood within a locality had indulged as of right in lawful sports and pastimes on the land for a period of at least 20 years up to the date of application.  This meant that the Panel had to consider whether every single test contained in section 15 of the Commons Act 2006 had been met. 

(6)       The first test was whether use of the site had been “as of right”; i.e without force, secrecy or permission.  The landowner had produced a copy of the Shorncliffe and District Military Byelaws 1976 which gave the public permission to use all parts of the military lands which were not specially enclosed.  Further research had, however, revealed that the byelaws had been made in exercise of the powers contained in the Military Lands Act 1892. This Act had specified that any byelaws made under its provisions had to be made publicly known locally.  No evidence had been produced to demonstrate that this had been the case. Consequently, the existence of the byelaws could not be relied upon as proof that use had been with permission.

(7)       The Commons Registration Officer turned to the question of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.