SPC logoExtraordinary Council Meeting Minutes



Cllr J Vine-Hall (Chairman of the Council)
Cllr P Glew (Vice-Chairman of the Council)
Cllrs P Anson, R Chapman, R Eldridge, J Parsons, J Reynolds
Clerk/Financial Officer - Pauline J Raymond

109 APOLOGIES. Cllr Fraser (away), Cllr Lawrence (working)

110 INTERESTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2012 CODE OF CONDUCT. Cllr Vine-Hall declared his personal interest in Agenda item 114 by virtue of his advice to the main claimant concerning how to claim a right of way in accordance with information available on the County Council website. He continued to chair the meeting.


112 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. No public present.

113 MINUTES. RESOLVED: That the Chairman is authorised to sign the Minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 14/01/14.Claim

114 APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION ORDER FOR TWO NEW FOOTPATHS FROM BREDE LANE. The Clerk gave a Powerpoint Presentation to explain the situation. A resident of Blacklands, supported by 30 others, had submitted a claim to East Sussex County Council (ESCC) that two footpaths had been omitted from the Sedlescombe Definitive Map of Rights of Way. Showing a footpath on a definitive map is irrefutable evidence that a public right of way across private land exists. The converse though is not true and the omission of a right of way does not mean there is not one across land. The public can claim a right of way and it may be allowed if it can be shown that the public has used the route and the landowner intended to dedicate it for public use.

Claimed paths. Both claimed paths run from Brede Lane, across the proposed development site at Street Farm, to join a well-used public footpath from East View to the Village.

Claimed Path A through SPC land. One path is purported to go through the boundary hedge and cross the Kickabout Area, both of which belong to the Parish Council (SPC). As landowner, SPC has been invited to comment on the claims being made. The evidence presented in the Powerpoint Presentation was restricted to claimed path A.

Claimants' Evidence. The main claimant had submitted the following in support of his claim that this is a path which the public have used as of right and which should be added to the Definitive Map of rights of way:

SPC reply to Claimants' Evidence. In reply to statements made by claimants, the Clerk produced the following evidence:

The Parish Council has three options regarding the small portion of the path that belongs to the Council ie through the Kickabout northern boundary and across the Kickabout Area:

  1. To dedicate a route through the Kickabout Area as a highway.
  2. To allow a permissive use and grant a licence to the public.
  3. To oppose the claim based on the evidence in hand.

It was RESOLVED: That, based on the overwhelming evidence, Sedlescombe Parish Council should oppose the claim that the public have a right to cross the northern boundary into and across the Kickabout Area and that the Clerk is authorised to complete and return the required form to East Sussex County Council.