Cases that changed previous precedent

• What is the L.P of Barkas? (where land could not be a VG because it was governed under s12 (1) of the Housing Act)

  L.P: dismissed the Beresford case by stating that passive acquiescence is explicit enough designation of permission, meaning that the public is therefore there by right, not as of right

  
  

  L.P: land can not be registered as a VG if it is governed by a Statute that states that the land has been consented to by a public body for residents to use it for recreational purposes (means that implied communication of permission can change rights from as of right to by right)
• What are the L.P of Newhaven Port? (where residents were unable to register a beach as a VG because if so, it would interfere with the public body's statutory duties)

  L.P: Even if bylaws that state that residents have permission to use the land have not been explicitly communicated, the residents' rights are still held to be by right (the existence of by-laws is enough)

  L.P: if the land concerned is public land, that land may not be registered as a VG as if registered, it would prevent the landowners from fulfiling their statutory purposes
• How have s 15A & 15B of the Growth & Infrastructure Act 2013 changed the registration of a VG?

  S15A & s15B: Landowners can deposit a statement & map with the commons registration authority which will thus bring an end to lawful use ‘as of right’ (any continued use is by permission)
• How has s 15C of the Growth & Infrastructure Act 2013 changed the registration of a VG?

  Introduces Schedule 1A to the Commons Act: Schedule sets out ‘trigger events’ which prevent village green registration: includes publication of planning event, identification in development scheme, grant of a planning permission
• What is the meaning of a 'trigger event'?

  Means that if someone demonstrates a serious intention to develop the land, it will prevent village green registration
• What were some reasons why amendments to the Commons Act were established?

  1. Belief that residents used TVG to prevent economic activity
  2. Undermined property rights of landowners (unfair balance)
  3. Registration would delay development
  4. VG law strayed too far as it now concerned land that was not green & not a village
• When amendments to the Commons Act were established, what did Clause 14 recommend to rebalance property rights?

  “Clause 14 covers interaction with the planning system: will prevent green applications being made where planning permission has been granted or where a planning application has been publicised and the decision is still to be made.
• What else does Clause 14 recommend?

  The changes will prevent town and village green applications for land identified for potential development in local and neighbourhood plans, including draft plans.
• How will the reforms in GAIA protect landowners?

  Will protect their ability to promote development in their areas through local and neighbourhood plan-making