Is the closure of the Ridgeway in Osfordshire illegal?

Patch

Registered user
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
261
Reaction score
0
Location
Hampshire
NERC as you are all aware has been ussed to justify the reclassification of parts of the Ridgeway as Restricted Byway removing vehicular access as a result.

I personally believe that the law as written does not support this action, it is improtant to bear in mind that the Right of Way is not enacted by NERC it is removed therfore unless the law as written is fulfilled the Right of Way must remain. Here's what NERC actually states about the removal of a right of way:

62
Ending of certain existing unrecorded public rights of way


(1)
An existing public right of way for mechanically propelled vehicles is

15

extinguished if it is over a way which, immediately before commencement—


(a)
was not shown in a definitive map and statement or was shown in a


definitive map and statement only as a footpath, bridleway or


restricted byway, and


(b)
was being used by the public mainly for one or more of the purposes

20

for which restricted byways are used or was not being used by the


public as a right of way of any kind.



But this is subject to subsections (2) to (4).


(2)
Subsection (1) does not apply to an existing public right of way if—


(a)
it was not shown in a definitive map and statement but was shown in a

25

list required to be kept under section 36(6) of the Highways Act 1980


(c. 66) (list of highways maintainable at public expense),


(b)
it was created (by an enactment or instrument or otherwise) on terms


that expressly provide for it to be a right of way for mechanically


propelled vehicles,

30

(c)
it was created by the construction, in exercise of powers conferred by


virtue of any enactment, of a road intended to be used by such vehicles,


or


(d)
it was created by virtue of use by such vehicles during a period ending


before 1st December 1930.


As can be seen two factors must be present before the right of way can be removed, the use of the word "and" is quite specific.

Clearly parts of the Ridgeway do fall under the remit of subsection 1 (a) but this alone is not enough to see the removal of the Right of Way and subsection 1 (b) must also be fulfilled.

The point of discussion is the word "immediately", interperatation of this word will be the foundation of justifying the removal of Right of Way. If the word immediately means the day before then it could well be argued that as the TRO was lifted on 1st May and NERC was introduced on 2nd May then the Ridgeway would have seen its highest use by vehicles "immediately" before the enactment, if however it means any othr period of time then the Ridgeway has a histroy of high vehicle use, hence the TRO's being applied to minimise winter damage.

Either way it will also be a requirement to prove the usage as defined in sub section (b) I would doubt that Oxfordshire County Council can produce accurate usage of the Ridgeway as there has never been any full survey of usage, please bear in mind that the Right of Way exists unless it "was being used by the public mainly for one or more of the purposes for which restricted byways are used or was not being used by the public as a right of way of any kind." It will be up to Oxfordshire County Council to prove the usage fulfilled subsection (b) or the Right of Way must remain.
 
Patch said:
NERC as you are all aware has been ussed to justify the reclassification of parts of the Ridgeway as Restricted Byway removing vehicular access as a result.

I personally believe that the law as written does not support this action, it is improtant to bear in mind that the Right of Way is not enacted by NERC it is removed therfore unless the law as written is fulfilled the Right of Way must remain. Here's what NERC actually states about the removal of a right of way:

62
Ending of certain existing unrecorded public rights of way


(1)
An existing public right of way for mechanically propelled vehicles is

15

extinguished if it is over a way which, immediately before commencement—


(a)
was not shown in a definitive map and statement or was shown in a


definitive map and statement only as a footpath, bridleway or


restricted byway, and


(b)
was being used by the public mainly for one or more of the purposes

20

for which restricted byways are used or was not being used by the


public as a right of way of any kind.



But this is subject to subsections (2) to (4).


(2)
Subsection (1) does not apply to an existing public right of way if—


(a)
it was not shown in a definitive map and statement but was shown in a

25

list required to be kept under section 36(6) of the Highways Act 1980


(c. 66) (list of highways maintainable at public expense),


(b)
it was created (by an enactment or instrument or otherwise) on terms


that expressly provide for it to be a right of way for mechanically


propelled vehicles,

30

(c)
it was created by the construction, in exercise of powers conferred by


virtue of any enactment, of a road intended to be used by such vehicles,


or


(d)
it was created by virtue of use by such vehicles during a period ending


before 1st December 1930.


As can be seen two factors must be present before the right of way can be removed, the use of the word "and" is quite specific.

Clearly parts of the Ridgeway do fall under the remit of subsection 1 (a) but this alone is not enough to see the removal of the Right of Way and subsection 1 (b) must also be fulfilled.

The point of discussion is the word "immediately", interperatation of this word will be the foundation of justifying the removal of Right of Way. If the word immediately means the day before then it could well be argued that as the TRO was lifted on 1st May and NERC was introduced on 2nd May then the Ridgeway would have seen its highest use by vehicles "immediately" before the enactment, if however it means any othr period of time then the Ridgeway has a histroy of high vehicle use, hence the TRO's being applied to minimise winter damage.

Either way it will also be a requirement to prove the usage as defined in sub section (b) I would doubt that Oxfordshire County Council can produce accurate usage of the Ridgeway as there has never been any full survey of usage, please bear in mind that the Right of Way exists unless it "was being used by the public mainly for one or more of the purposes for which restricted byways are used or was not being used by the public as a right of way of any kind." It will be up to Oxfordshire County Council to prove the usage fulfilled subsection (b) or the Right of Way must remain.


It's all a mystery to me :nenau :nenau

Take it to the European Court of Human Rights....................along with the rest Bliar's ill thought out and enacted 'knee-jerk' laws

Calls himself a Lawyer........Pah :spitfire
 
Oxfordshire CC are a law entirely unto themselves - they are absolutely unaccountable. I know of several traffic calming schemes that breach every guideline known to man. Will the council even admit it, let alone do anything about it? Nope - they'll slither, slime and dodge every question you throw at them.

If this IS illegal (and I wouldn't be at all surprised - a little bit of law isn't allowed to get in the way of politically correct vehicle-hating around here), you'd need to challenge them on it, then, when you get more puff and smoke than magic-dragon soup, you need to take them to the local government Ombudsman.

Then they'll just find another law to use and do it anyway.

Don't think for a single moment that these people are public servants - they are there because they know what's best for you and they just LOVE telling people what to do... :spitfire
 
Patch,
You've quoted an out-of-date version of the NERC Bill, before it was ammended in the House of Lords. The NERC Act (commenced on 2nd May in England) is different. ;)

The effect on parts of the Ridgeway is still not 100% clear :nenau Try the local TRF, they should know better than anyone.
 
Ian B said:
Try the local TRF, they should know better than anyone.

They are keeping it a little close to their chest at the moment - I'm not sure what will occur (yet).
 
I got stopped two years ago on The Ridgeway adjacent to Gore Hill Pig Farm by PC Pete Hale who is a 'Top Copper' who then didn't have a clue about ROW :dabone

He told me we were riding on a RUPP and that our bikes needed to be road legal. I told him I already knew that and that they (the bikes) were road legal. Tis funny how if that same meeting occured today he would be trying to lock me up for being a law breaker :nono

OK two years ago, now illegal today. What we need is someone to get arrested riding a RUPP so the leagality of what this Government has done can be challenged in court. Any volunteers? :D
 
I see in the 'Code of Respect' section that neither the 'Friends of The Ridgeway' the 'Ramblers Association' or 'GLEAM' are mentioned. Tis funny how they through the back door obtained a vehicular ban even after withdrawing from the code :spitfire
 
Speedy said:
Just found this www.nationaltrail.co.uk/ridgeway/text.asp?PageId=83 which details the sections you can still ride.

On this web page it says "If you wish to ride a motorbike, or drive a 4 by 4 or car on The Ridgeway you can now legally use the following sections (most of which can only be used by recreational vehicles from 1st May to 30th September each year).

What's the difference between "recreational vehicles" and non-recreational vehicles? If I wanted to get from point A to point B using the Ridgeway, why can't I?

Cheers,

Neil.
 
Recreational vehicles is you and me who don't have to use it for our work. Non Recreational Vehicles are farmers in Land Rovers and 10 tonne tractors who can destroy the Byways/RUPPS/Restricted Byways regardless of the time of year or surface condition. Under NERC you can only 'legally' use sections of The Ridgeway from 1st Mayl to 30th September unless like me you are selective as to when and where you ride and if challenged won't stop :thumb
 


Back
Top Bottom