Open country land may mean high bills

They may even be hit by increased premiums for public liability insurance following a recent ruling by the Court of Appeal.

The land in question had not been designated under the Crow Act but land agents Strutt and Parker's Richard Greasby is concerned that the legal precedent the case sets will be applied to Crow Act land.

Mr Greasby said the Government had stated that landowners would not be liable for accidents on open country caused by natural features.

But the case of Wilson and Donaldson suggested this is only part of a much bigger and more worrying story.

"In that case a farmer was deemed liable for a road accident caused by stock that escaped onto a road through a gate left open by a walker. Because the farmer was held responsible by the court and not the walker, the ruling means that a landowner's duty of care extends to guarding against the carelessness of people who are lawfully on his land.

Lawful access

"And under the terms of the Crow Act, the public will have lawful access to any land designated as open country," said Mr Greasby.

The court ruled that the farmer should have taken more steps to ensure the gate was closed. Signs should have been put up requesting that the gate be shut and the gate fitted with a self-closing mechanism.

Failing that, the gate should have been locked and alternative access offered by a stile or kissing gate.

Mr Greasby remarked: "Although the court stressed that each case is decided on its own facts, our concern is that if the principles that seem to be established by Wilson and Donaldson are extended to Crow Act land, then farmers and landowners face additional costs - initially in the form of increased repair and maintenance bills - to guard against the carelessness of those enjoying the new rights.

"Sooner or later, increased damages will result in higher insurance premiums for public liability cover. In other words it will be the landowners and farmers who end up paying."