Landowners must escape liability trap - Access to the countryside

There is a long tradition of pretty much unhindered access to the Irish countryside for anyone who enjoys the great, soul-soothing outdoors. Landowners are, in the great majority of cases, welcoming, though there are occasional exceptions to this generous live-and-let-live culture.

This open-gate practice stands in stark contrast to the situation across the Irish Sea, where landowners sometimes stridently assert what they describe as their right to prohibit access and their absolute right to privacy. This trespassers-prosecuted policy is one of the many issues driving the land reforms — if that’s the right term — under consideration by the Scottish parliament. This Scottish Nationalist Party agenda seems likely to go ahead, despite claims that it is little different from a Mugabe-like land grab. It may go ahead too, despite the compromises reached in many areas — that the right to ramble comes with certain obligations. These responsibilities include very reasonable expectations like not causing damage to farming activities like, say, allowing an unleashed dog harass sheep, leaving litter or not closing gates. Many agreements include clauses that confine hill walkers to defined paths to minimise the intrusion or the potential to damage their legitimate farm, forestry or sporting activities. They seem a good compromise and work.

That freedom to wander, to enjoy the uplands that can be so very magnificently uplifting at this time if the year, is under threat in Ireland because of a court award made last week. That award, which is to be appealed, also jeopardises a growing segment of the tourism market, one epitomised by the hugely successful Wild Atlantic Way. Teresa Wall, a 59-year-old from Swords, Co Dublin, fell on a boardwalk of partially rotten railway sleepers on the Wicklow Way in August, 2013. She cut her knee and needed seven stitches. The Circuit Civil Court awarded her €40,000 — €5,714 a stitch. The award was made against the National Parks and Wildlife Service because, the court concluded, it failed to take reasonable care to maintain a boardwalk in a safe condition.