Photo by Tony Austin
Landowners Euan and Claire Snowie had sought to exclude walkers, cyclists and horseriders from 40 acres of their Boquhan estate near Kippen, claiming they needed such a large area for privacy and security. In April 2008, Ramblers Scotland and Stirling Council won their legal case against Euan Snowie and Claire Snowie, which came to court during May 2007. The judgement was appealed, and the case was set to be heard in the Court of Session. However the case was abandoned after legal arguments and costs awarded to The Ramblers and Stirling Council.
Dennis Canavan, Convener of Ramblers Scotland said: “I welcome the abandonment of the appeal and I think that Mr Snowie and his legal advisors have come to the right decision. Sheriff Andrew Cubie’s judgement at Stirling Sheriff Court will now be seen as a landmark decision in the interpretation of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. This gives Mr Snowie and his family a reasonable degree of privacy, while confirming the right of access to the rest of the estate.”
The case involved an application by the Snowies to declare 40 acres of their 70-acre Boquhan estate to be land on which access rights do not apply. This is the same process applied for by Ann Gloag at Kinfauns Castle, Perth, which Ramblers Scotland and Perth & Kinross Council opposed, but the Sheriff in this case agreed with Mrs Gloag.
In 2005, the Snowies, owners of the Boquhan Estate near Kippen, locked gates preventing public access across their land. This route had been used for many years by locals and so, after complaints from residents and discussions with the estate, one gate was opened. After further complaints, it was found that the gate had been locked again so Stirling Council served a legal notice on the owner to unlock the gate and enable access. The landowner appealed the notice and the case was due to be heard on 20th September 2006 at Stirling Sheriff Court. However, the case was delayed as it was then learnt that Mr Snowie had also applied for a “declarator” under Section 28 of the Land Reform Act to rule that the 70-acre estate should be declared land on which access rights do not apply. This area claimed as private was later reduced to 40-acres. Mr Snowie argued that excluding the public was essential to protect himself and his family, and for shooting on his estate. It was also found that the residents of the lodge at the locked gates were responsible for locking them and they were included in the court action.
Ramblers Scotland agreed with the council that the exclusion zone was unnecessarily large, and was supportive of the council’s opposition to this application, as well as the serving of the legal notice to unlock the gate. Crucially, Mr Snowie was seeking to declare the driveways of his estate to be areas on which access rights did not apply. Ramblers Scotland believed that the Scottish Outdoor Access Code was clear in paragraph 3.16 that driveways should be included, and that access could be taken past gatehouses. It was decided that Ramblers should become parties to the case as it was felt that a significant contribution to the case could be made, following similar experience in the Kinfauns case, and having extensive knowledge and understanding of the land reform legislation and the parliamentary process which led to its development.
The hearings took place in May 2007 and included a site visit by the sheriff and all three parties. The judgement was announced on 23rd April 2008 and costs were awarded to Stirling Council and the Ramblers’ Association. Mr Snowie then decided to appeal the decision and it is that appeal which has just been abandoned.