Adamson v Paddico (267) Ltd

Adamson v Paddico (267) Ltd

The registration of Clayton Fields as a village green was unlawful because the user was by inhabitants of two areas (Edgerton and Birkby), which did not constitute a single locality as required by section 22(1) of the Commons Registration Act 1965. However, the delay of over 12 years in seeking rectification was so excessive that it would not be just to rectify the register.

Parties
Appellant: Jonathan Adamson; First Respondent: Paddico (267) Limited; Second Respondent: Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council; Third Respondent: William John Magee; Fourth Respondent: Thomas Michael Courtney Hardy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (chancery Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed (majority) on the ground of justice; rectification of the register refused due to excessive delay.
Legal Topics
Commons Registration, Village Greens, Rectification of Public Registers, Delay and Justice in Rectification, Interpretation of 'locality' Under Commons Registration Act 1965
Land Law Administrative Law Public Law Commons Registration Village Greens Rectification of Public Registers Delay and Justice in Rectification Interpretation of 'locality' Under Commons Registration Act 1965

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jonathan Adamson

Appellant

Paddico (267) Limited

First Respondent

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council

Second Respondent

William John Magee

Third Respondent

Thomas Michael Courtney Hardy

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court (chancery Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Clayton Fields was lawfully registered as a town or village green under section 13 of the Commons Registration Act 1965 based on user by inhabitants of Edgerton and Birkby
  2. 2 Whether the registration could be justified by reference to any alternative locality
  3. 3 Whether it was just to rectify the register given the delay in seeking rectification

Ratio Decidendi

The registration of Clayton Fields as a village green was unlawful because the user was by inhabitants of two areas (Edgerton and Birkby), which did not constitute a single locality as required by section 22(1) of the Commons Registration Act 1965. However, the delay of over 12 years in seeking rectification was so excessive that it would not be just to rectify the register.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed (majority) on the ground of justice; rectification of the register refused due to excessive delay.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed; the register of town and village greens is not to be rectified to delete the entry relating to Clayton Fields.