Scottish Rights of Way & Access Society

  • Outdoor Access
    • Introduction
    • Signposting
    • Bridges
    • Grants
    • Heritage Paths
    • Scottish Hill Tracks
    • Maps and Leaflets
    • Catalogue of Rights of Way
    • Solicitor Enquiry Searches
  • Who We Are
    • Introduction
    • Our History
    • Directors
    • Staff
    • Contact Us
    • Governance
    • Vacancies
  • Support Us
    • Introduction
    • Become A Member
    • Become A Volunteer
    • Donate
    • Leave A Gift in Your Will
    • Sign Up to Our E-Newsletter
    • Take Action
    • Shop
  • News
  • Ask Ken
 0 Items - £0.00

I’m Ken, the ScotWays Knowledge Base

Ask Me Your Outdoor Access Question

Important People of Scottish Access

12
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Adam Black (1784-1874)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Archibald Eneas Robertson (1870-1958)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Arthur W Russell (1873-1967)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Donald Bennet (1928-2013)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Donald Grant Moir  (1902-1986)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – John George Bartholomew (1860-1920)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – John Hutton Balfour (1808-1884)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Professor Sir Robert (Bob) Grieve (1910 -1995)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Rennie McOwan (1933-2018)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Viscount James Bryce (1838-1922)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – Walter Arthur Smith (1852-1934)
  • Important People of Scottish Access – William Ferris (1894-1963)

Introducing Ken

1
  • Hello, my name is Ken.

Court Cases

144
  • An outline of the Scottish Courts System
  • The Authority of Case Law
  • Cases under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003
    • Aviemore Highland Resort v Cairngorms National Park Authority
    • Caledonian Heritable Ltd v East Lothian Council
    • Creelman v Argyll & Bute Council
    • Forbes v Fife Council
    • Gloag v Perth & Kinross Council and the Rambler’s Association
    • Law Society of Scotland v Scottish Legal Complaints Commission
    • Renyana Stahl Anstalt v Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park Authority Appeal Decision
    • Snowie v Stirling Council and Ramblers Association Lindsay and Barbara Ross v Stirling Council
    • Tuley v Highland Council
    • Williamson v Highland Activities Limited
  • Public rights of way and private servitude rights of way
    • Creation of public rights of way – need for public place end points
      • Cuthbertson v Young
      • Darrie v Drummond
      • Duncan v Lees
      • Jenkins v Murray
      • Lauder v MacColl
      • Leith-Buchanan v Hogg
      • Magistrates of Dunblane v Arnold-McCulloch
      • Marquis of Bute v McKirdy & McMillan
      • Melfort Pier Holidays Ltd v The Melfort Club and Others
      • Midlothian Council v Crolla
      • Oswald v Lawrie
      • Scott v Drummond
      • Smith v Saxton
      • Wood v North British Railway
    • Creation of public rights of way – use as of right by the public for the prescriptive period
      • Aberdeen City Council v Wanchoo and Neumann v Hutchison
      • Ayr Burgh Council v British Transport Commission
      • Burt v Barclay
      • Cadell v Stevenson
      • Cumbernauld & Kilsyth District Council v Dollar Land (Cumbernauld) Ltd
      • Duffield Morgan v Lord Advocate
      • Kinloch’s Trustees v Young
      • Magistrates of Elgin v Robertson
      • McGregor v Crieff Co-operative Society Ltd
      • McInroy v Duke of Athole
      • Norrie v Magistrates of Kirriemuir
      • Rhins District Committee of the County Council of Wigtownshire v Cunninghame
      • Richardson v Cromarty Petroleum Co Ltd
      • Rome v Hope Johnstone
      • Scottish Rights of Way & Recreation Society Ltd v Macpherson
      • Strathclyde (Hyndland) Housing Society Ltd v Cowie
      • Wills Trustees v Cairngorm Canoeing and Sailing School Ltd
      • Wilson v Jamieson
    • Creation of rights of way – interruption of the prescriptive period
      • Mann v Brodie
    • Different kinds of use of rights of way
      • Aberdeenshire Council v Lord Glentanar
      • Carstairs v Spence
      • Crawford v Lumsden
      • Macfarlane v Morrison & Others (Robertson’s Trustees)
      • Mackenzie v Bankes
      • Malcolm v Lloyd
    • Need for a particular line for public rights of way
      • Home Drummond & Another (Petitioners)
      • Hozier v Hawthorne
      • Mackintosh v Moir
    • Obstruction of rights of way
      • Aitchison v India Tyre & Rubber Co.
      • Anderson v Earl of Morton
      • Drury v McGarvie
      • Earl of Morton v Anderson
      • Fife Council v Nisbet
      • Geils v Thomson
      • Glasgow and Carlisle Road Trustees v Tennant
      • Glasgow and Carlisle Road Trustees v Whyte
      • Graham v Sharpe
      • Hay v Earl of Morton’s Trustees
      • Kirkpatrick v Murray
      • Lanarkshire Water Board v Gilchrist
      • Lord Donington v Mair
      • Macdonald v Watson
      • Midlothian District Council v MacKenzie
      • Rodgers v Harvie
      • Soriani v Cluckie
      • Stewart, Pott & Co. v Brown Brothers & Co
      • Sutherland v Thomson
    • Procedural issues
      • Alexander v Picken
      • Alston v Ross
      • Hope v Landward District Committee of the Parish Council of Inveresk
      • Macfie v Scottish Rights of Way and Recreation Society Limited
      • Nairn v Speedie
      • Potter v Hamilton
      • Torrie v Duke of Atholl
    • Public and private rights of way – ancillary rights and burdens
      • Allan v McLachlan
      • Lord Burton v Mackay
      • McRobert v Reid
      • Milne v Inveresk Parish Council
      • Moncrieff v Jamieson
      • Preston’s Trustees v Preston
    • Relationship of public rights of way with private servitude rights of way and with ‘roads’ under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984
      • Public rights of way and ‘roads’ under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984
        • Davidson v Earl of Fife
        • Hamilton v Dumfries & Galloway Council
        • Hamilton v Nairn
      • Relationship of public rights of way with private servitude rights of way
        • Alvis v Harrison
        • McGavin v McIntyre
        • Thomson v Murdoch
    • Rights of way – land owned by statutory undertakers or the Crown
      • Ayr Harbour Trustees v Oswald
      • British Transport v Westmoreland County Council
      • Edinburgh Corporation v North British Railway Co.
      • Ellice’s Trustees v Commissioners for the Caledonian Canal
      • Kinross County Council v Archibald
      • Lord Advocate v Strathclyde Regional Council and Lord Advocate v Dumbarton District Council
      • Oban Town Council v Callander & Oban Railway
      • The Ramblers Association v The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (and Others)
  • Navigation rights and rights in relation to the foreshore
    • Navigation rights
      • Campbell’s Trustees v Sweeney
      • Colquhoun’s Trustees v Orr Ewing & Co
      • Crown Estate Commissioners v Fairlie Yacht Slip Ltd.
      • Denaby and Cadeby Main Collieries Ltd v Anson
      • Ellerman Lines Ltd v Clyde Navigation Trustees
      • Kames Bay Case – Petition of the Crown Estate Commissioners
      • Walford v David
      • Wills Trustees v Cairngorm Canoeing and Sailing School Ltd
    • Rights in relation to the foreshore
      • Leith-Buchanan v Hogg
      • Marquis of Bute v McKirdy & McMillan
      • Officers of State v Smith
  • Liability
    • Cases relating to contributory negligence
      • Smith v Finch
    • Liability of recreational users to one another
      • Anthony Phee v James Gordon & Niddry Castle Golf Club 4 November 2011
      • Milne v Duguid
      • Pearson v Lightning
    • Occupiers’ liability: Cases involving ‘hazards’ in the outdoors
      • Anderson v The Scottish Ministers
      • Brown v South Lanarkshire Council
      • Duff v East Dunbartonshire Council
      • Fegan v Highland Regional Council
      • Graham v East of Scotland Water
      • Johnstone v Sweeney
      • Lang v Kerr Anderson & Co.
      • Marshall v North Ayrshire Council
      • McCluskey v Lord Advocate
      • Michael Leonard v The Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park Authority
      • Prosecution by the Health & Safety Executive Dunoon Sheriff Court, 18th August 2010
      • Strachan v Highland Council
      • Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council
      • Trueman v Aberdeenshire Council
      • Wright v Nevis Range Development Company
    • Occupiers’ liability: Cases involving children
      • Dawson v Scottish Power
      • Glasgow Corporation v Taylor
      • Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council
      • Stevenson v Glasgow Corporation
    • Occupiers’ liability: Cases involving facilities/indoor premises
      • McCondichie v Mains Medical Centre
      • Poppleton v Peter Ashley Activities Centre
      • Porter v Borders Council
    • Cases involving animals
      • Gardiner v Miller
      • Shirley McKaskie v John Cameron
      • Welsh v Brady
  • Other cases of interest
    • Carol Rohan Beyts v Trump International Golf Club Scotland Limited
    • Law Society of Scotland v Scottish Legal Complaints Commission
    • Neizer v Rhodes
    • R v Howard

The Bookshelf

30
  • Welcome to The Bookshelf
  • Legislation
    • Legislation 1960-1969
    • Legislation 1970-1979
    • Legislation 1980-1989
    • Legislation 1990-1999
    • Legislation 2000-2009
    • Legislation 2010-2019
    • Legislation 2020-2029
  • Guidance on Legislation
    • Guidance on Legislation 1990-1999
    • Guidance on Legislation 2000-2009
    • Guidance on Legislation 2010-2019
    • Guidance on Legislation 2020-2029
  • Responsible Access
    • Publications on Responsible Access 1990-1999
    • Publications on Responsible Access 2000-2009
    • Publications on Responsible Access 2010-2019
  • Rights of Way and Outdoor Access Management
    • Land Management
      • Managing Land for Outdoor Access 2000-2009
    • Path Management
      • Path Management 1980-1989
      • Path Management 1990-1999
      • Path Management 2000-2009
      • Path Management 2010-2019
      • Path Management 2020-2029
    • People Management
      • Managing the Public 2000-2009
      • Managing the Public 2010-2019
    • Signposting
      • Signposting and Interpretation 1990-1999
      • Signposting and Interpretation 2010-2019
      • Signposting and Interpretation 2020-2029
  • Surveys of Rights of Way, Access and Procedures
    • Surveys of Rights of Way, Outdoor Access and Procedures 1980-1989
    • Surveys of Rights of Way, Outdoor Access and Procedures 1990-1999
    • Surveys of Rights of Way, Outdoor Access and Procedures 2000-2009
    • Surveys of Rights of Way, Outdoor Access and Procedures 2010-2019

About Access Rights

40
  • What are Outdoor Access Rights?
  • Rights of Way
    • A local landowner has fenced off a path that is well used by local people, and has put up a sign saying No trespassers’. What can I do about it?
    • Can I ride my motorbike on a right of way or take it off road?
    • Development Proposals and Outdoor Access
    • Do public rights of way exist in Scotland?
    • Horse riders are using a local path and churning it up so that it is difficult for walkers to use. What can be done?
    • How does a route become a right of way?
    • Is there any need for rights of way, now that there is freedom of access?
    • Is there any record of rights of way in Scotland?
    • My neighbour says he has a right to go along the path at the back of my house. Could this be a public right of way?
    • Private Signs, Private Roads, Public Roads, What’s the difference?
    • Rights of access to land
    • There is a path close to my house which local people say is a right of way. Can I divert the route so as to protect my privacy?
    • There is a proposal for a windfarm development that will be close to a well-used right of way. What can be done?
    • Where can I cycle?
    • Where Can I Ride or Drive my Horse?
    • Who’s responsible for path maintenance?
  • Statutory Access Rights
    • A Brief History of Access Rights
    • A local landowner has fenced off a path that is well used by local people, and has put up a sign saying No trespassers’. What can I do about it?
    • Are access rights different in Scotland from those in England and Wales?
    • Can I go wild camping in Scotland?
    • Can I ride my motorbike on a right of way or take it off road?
    • Horse riders are using a local path and churning it up so that it is difficult for walkers to use. What can be done?
    • Is there any need for rights of way, now that there is freedom of access?
    • Private Signs, Private Roads, Public Roads, What’s the difference?
    • Right to Roam Timeline
    • Rights of access to land
    • The Coming of Access Rights
    • The Scottish Outdoor Access Code, A Replacement for the Country Code
    • What activities are covered by rights of access?
    • What activities are not covered by rights of access?
    • What are core paths?
    • What does behaving responsibly mean?
    • What happens when there is a dispute about whether, or how, the rights of access apply?
    • What is a Local Access forum?
    • Where can I cycle?
    • Where Can I Ride or Drive my Horse?
    • Where do access rights not apply?
    • Who should I contact if I have a problem about access rights?
    • Who’s responsible for path maintenance?

History

17
  • 175th Anniversary
  • 1844 The beginning of ScotWays
  • 1964 When figure 740 changed the face of path signs
  • A Brief History of Access Rights
  • Boardwalks, the oldest types of constructed path
  • Historic Footpaths
  • Right to Roam Timeline
  • ScotWays’s Oldest Standing Signpost
  • The Association for the Protection of Public Rights of Roadway in and Around Edinburgh
  • The Bedford Memorial Bridge
  • The Changing Face of ScotWays Signs
  • The Coming of Access Rights
  • The First ScotWays Signposts
  • The History of ScotWays
  • The Launch of the Heritage Paths website
  • Welcome the Scottish Rights of Way and Recreation Society Limited
  • What’s in a name?

Scottish Hill Tracks

19
  • Scottish Hill Tracks ~ Overview
  • SECTION 11: Glen Coe & Appin
  • SECTION 13: Loch Leven to Glen Spean
  • SECTION 14: Ardgour, Moidart & Morven
  • SECTION 15: West Mounth & Sidlaw Hills
  • SECTION 17: Cairngorms
  • SECTION 19: Monadh Liath
  • SECTION 2: Central & South-West Borders
  • SECTION 20: Loch Eil to Glen Shiel
  • SECTION 21: Glen Affric, Kintail & Strathfarrar
  • SECTION 22: Mull & Skye
  • SECTION 23: Wester Ross
  • SECTION 24: Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross
  • SECTION 3: Lammermuir & Moorfoot Hills
  • SECTION 4: Pentland Hills
  • SECTION 5: Clydesdale & Lowther Hills
  • SECTION 6: Galloway & South Ayrshire
  • SECTION 7: Arran, Inverclyde & North Ayrshire
  • SECTION 9: Southern Highlands

Heritage Paths

18
  • Heritage Paths Introduction
  • Historic Footpaths
  • The Launch of the Heritage Paths website
  • About Types of Heritage Paths
    • Coffin Roads
    • Drove Roads
    • Fish Roads
    • Heritage Paths Introduction
    • Leisure Paths
    • Medieval Roads
    • Military Roads
    • Pilgrimage Routes
    • Postie Paths
    • Public works and private enterprise: moving towards the modern transport system
    • Religious Routes
    • Roman Roads
    • Salters’ Roads
    • Trade Routes
    • Traveller Routes

Signposting

5
  • 1964 When figure 740 changed the face of path signs
  • A Signposting Tour of the Cairngorms
  • ScotWays’s Oldest Standing Signpost
  • The Changing Face of ScotWays Signs
  • The First ScotWays Signposts

#RespectProtectEnjoy

3
  • A different way to get there or doing something different.
  • Different Ways
  • Places to Visit
  • Home
  • Ask Ken
  • Court Cases
  • Public rights of way and private servitude rights of way
  • Obstruction of rights of way
  • Lanarkshire Water Board v Gilchrist

Lanarkshire Water Board v Gilchrist

Case Report: 1973 SLT 58

Key points: Servitude right of way over unfenced land – access to Water Board reservoir – bulls, other dangerous animals – animals ‘of uncertain temperament’.

The facts: The Water Board had a right of way to its reservoir over unfenced farmland, part of which was owned by Gilchrist, who allowed a bull to roam at will throughout the unfenced portions of his farm. The Water Board feared for the safety of its employees using the road on foot and of the families of its employees occupying houses at the reservoir. It sought Interdict against Gilchrist from keeping the bull at large on the unfenced land.

Decision: On appeal, the Sheriff Principal granted Interdict preventing Gilchrist from allowing a bull to be present on unfenced land adjacent to the right of way.

Legal arguments: Gilchrist had argued that he had not interfered with the Water Board’s enjoyment of its right of access, if it was exercised in the way which caused the smallest possible inconvenience to the owner of the land. No explanation as to how this might be done was given in Gilchrist’s pleadings but his solicitor suggested that persons wishing to walk along the road might telephone the farm to give advance notice of their intent or alternatively that the use of the road by pedestrians might be restricted to certain hours of the day. These suggestions were dismissed by the Sheriff Principal as impracticable and clearly restrictive of the full enjoyment of the right of access. Gilchrist also sought the opportunity of demonstrating that the bull in question was not a dangerous bull. The Sheriff Principal saw no value in allowing a proof as the present bull could be replaced at any time by another, possibly more dangerous one. He regarded as within judicial knowledge the fact that a bull is of uncertain temper and is liable at any time to become vicious and to cause injury to human beings.

Comments: The decision, in this case, is capable of being extended to cover dangerous animals (even such as red or roe deer) pastured in the vicinity of public rights of way. It would also appear to apply not only to rights of way running through unfenced land but also to rights of way through a fenced field in which a bull (with or without cows) or other dangerous animals are being allowed to graze. For instance, would a right of way running through a deer park be regarded as being obstructed, it being traditionally recognised that at certain times of the year deer can become a danger to humans? The crucial point is that the owner of animals with dangerous characteristics (whether on the basis of species, breed, gender or age) can be prevented from allowing them to roam at large in the vicinity of public pedestrian rights of way.

Note that, in relation to a public right of way, the following offence applies under the Countryside (Scotland) Act 1967: ‘Section 44 (1) No person shall, being the occupier of any field or enclosure through which there is a public right of way, permit any bull to be at large in such field or enclosure:

Provided that this section shall not apply to any bull which—
(a) does not exceed the age of 10 months; or
(b) is not of a recognised dairy breed and is at large in any field or enclosure in which cows or heifers are also at large.’

Cases referred to:
(1) Brock v Copeland (1794) 1 Esp 203 (Not in Ken).
(2) Henderson v John Stuart (Farms) Ltd 1963 SLT 22 (Not in Ken).
(3) Milligan v Henderson 1915 SC 1030 (Not in Ken).
(4) Harpers v Great N of Scotland Railway Co (1886) 13 R 139 (Not in Ken).

Case Law Public rights of way and private servitude rights of way, Court Case, Obstruction of Rights of Way, Public rights of way and private servitude rights of way, Rights of Way
Did this help?
Share This Article :
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
Still stuck? How can we help?

How can we help?

Updated on 4 January 2022

Powered by BetterDocs

Privacy Policy & Cookies Terms & Conditions of Business Website Terms & Conditions
  • Follow
  • Follow
The Scottish Rights of Way & Access Society. Upholding Public Access.
Registered Office: 24 Annandale Street, Edinburgh, EH7 4AN. Tel: 0131 558 1222.
A company limited by guarantee, registered in Scotland. Company number 24243.
Scottish Charity number SC015460.
VAT registration number 221 6132 56.
©2000-
Website by Digital Routes Ltd