moved Amendment No. 44:"Page 6, line 25, leave out subsection (3)."
The noble Baroness said: This is, again, a probing amendment. Page 16 of the Explanatory Notes lists the mechanisms that it is believed would cause, by common law, a right of common to be extinguished. We wonder whether the Government are right to wish the rights of common to continue, even where common land is destroyed—for example, because it is reclaimed by the sea or where its product is exhausted, such as when peat subject to the rights of turbary runs out.
We also question what the Government feel should happen to the rights affected by, for example, the creation of a reservoir on land to which common rights are attached. Under common law, they would disappear along with the land, but if the Government decree that common law cannot apply in such circumstances, what will happen to the rights? Surely that is another instance in which the Government’s intentions should appear in the Bill. I beg to move.
Commons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Byford
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 25 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c318-9GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:03:16 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269744
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269744
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269744