New access rights under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CRoW) are now in place, opening up large swathes of land that were previously off limits.
People can now walk on mountain, moors and common land throughout England, subject to certain restrictions - see www.openaccess.gov.uk/ wps/portal/lm/restricting for details.
The biggest difference concerning these new access rights is that the public do not have to stay on rights of way, paths and tracks, but can roam anywhere on land with CRoW access rights.
With more land opened up and potentially more people using it, it is important that owners and managers understand what CRoW means in terms of rights, restrictions and liabilities.
Restrictions for visitors, for example, include not riding horses, driving vehicles, camping or taking anything such as rocks or plants from the land. Dogs must be kept on a lead near livestock and, from March 1 to July 31, to protect breeding birds.
Under the Occupiers' Liability Acts of 1957 and 1984, a land occupier can be sued for injury or damage to someone that results from the state of their land, or from something done (or not done) on the land.
There is a duty of care under the 1957 Act to take reasonable care that visitors will be reasonably safe, while the 1984 Act sets out the duty of care owed to non-visitors, such as trespassers. Here, the occupier still has a duty of care if they are aware of a danger (or have reasonable grounds for believing it exists) and know (or have reasonable grounds to believe) that a trespasser may come into the vicinity of the danger.
If the land falls under the CRoW access rights, CroW provides that an occupier cannot be under any greater duty of care as a result of the right to roam than he would otherwise have been under the general law.
The duty of care under the 1957 Act does not apply to people exercising the CRoW access rights, though the occupier still has a duty of care to anyone they have invited or permitted to be on their land.
The lesser duty of care owed to a trespasser under the 1984 Act is further reduced. Unless the landowner has set out to create a risk, or is reckless about whether a risk is created, he owes no duty and cannot be sued for any damage or injury created by any natural feature of the landscape or people passing over, under or through any fence, wall, gates, except by proper use of the gate or a stile.
However, liability may still exist under the Animals Act 1971, for example, if an animal is not restrained and injures someone or causes damage.
* Tafozzul Ali is a solicitor in the commercial property team at Blackett Hart & Pratt. He can be contacted on 0191-221 0898.
Published: 29/11/2005
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article