| |
|
|||
|
||||
|
|
IMPORTANT PLEASE READ This website and forum has been living on borrowed web server time for years. At the end of this month silsden.net in it's present form will cease to exist, BUT there is a new silsden.net in the making, and a new forum, and lots of exciting new things coming to this space. Peter |
back
to General Forum | back to forum index | login
|
sign
up | help
| latest topics | search
Replies in this thread : 14
Author |
Topic : Public Footpaths |
|
| grandad |
Question, Can a cyclist legally use a footpath; if they are pushing the cycle? |
|
| midway |
There is good evidence, although no direct case law, to support the view that pushing a cycle on a footpath is not illegal. The presence of obstacles such as stiles should not be seen as a reason not to permit cycle use of footpaths. |
|
| gazzer |
Note on the law relating to pushing bicycles on public footpaths Based on Opinion by Counsel presented to a Public Inquiry in Milton Keynes, July 1997 Section 72 of the Highways Act 1835 provides that a person shall be guilty of an offence if he : "shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot-passengers … or shall wilfully lead or drive any … carriage of any description … upon any such footpath or causeway ". Section 85 of the Local Government Act 1888 extends the definition of "carriage" to include "bicycles, tricycles, velocipedes and other similar machines". "Leading or driving" clearly does not apply to a bicycle. It would apply only to other types of carriage drawn by animals, or to a horse, ass, sheep, mule, swine, cattle, truck or sledge (which are also referred to specifically in Section 72). The only basis of the offence would therefore be if someone pushing a bicycle were deemed to be "riding" it. More significantly there is clear authority for the proposition that section 72 of the Highways Act 1835 only applies to footpaths which run along the side of a road (R v Pratt [1867] 3 QBD 64, followed in Selby v DPP [1994] RTR 157). In his judgment in Pratt, Mellor J states: "It is clear what the object of this enactment [i.e. Section 72 Highways Act 1835] was: it was intended not to protect footpaths simpliciter, but only footpaths or causeways by the side of a road" This interpretation was accepted by the Court of Appeal in Selby, a case which concerned a motorcyclist sitting astride a motorcycle and 'freewheeling' down an alleyway which linked two roads but did not itself run alongside a road. In delivering judgment in the Court of Appeal, Henry J said: "It is clear from R v Pratt that they [i.e. the Magistrates in this case] were bound to find that the alleyway in question did not constitute a footpath … and their finding on that point was quite right" Finally, there is clear judicial authority for the proposition that anyone pushing a bicycle is a "foot-passenger" (Crank v Brooks [1980] RTR 441) and is not "riding" it (Selby). In his judgment in the Court of Appeal in Crank v Brooks, Waller LJ stated: "In my judgment a person who is walking across a pedestrian crossing pushing a bicycle, having started on the pavement on one side on her feet and not on the bicycle, and going across pushing the bicycle with both feet on the ground so to speak is clearly a 'foot passenger'. If for example she had been using it as a scooter by having one foot on the pedal and pushing herself along, she would not have been a 'foot passenger'. But the fact that she had the bicycle in her hand and was walking does not create any difference from a case where she is walking without a bicycle in her hand. I regard it as unarguable the finding that she was not a foot passenzer " Furthermore, in his judgment in the Court of Appeal in Selby Taylor LJ noted that when the case was heard by the Magistrates: "… there was no evidence before them at that stage as to how that travel had been accomplished, namely, whether the appellant had been riding the motorcycle or wheeling it" It is therefore apparent that there is a clear difference between riding a motorcycle and wheeling it. Henry J had commented earlier in his judgment that what applies to a motorcycle must also apply to a bicycle. |
|
| old_miner |
Very interesting, and helpful. Any info on roads blocked off to wide powered vehicles but not narrow powered vehicles. I am thinking of the road under the canal which is useful for motorcycles if main road is blocked. |
|
| Peter |
It's a pity the judgement didn't include vehicles parked on pavements/footpaths. |
|
| grandad |
Peter you are off topic! The question was and still is can a farmer stop a person pushing their cycle along a public footpath which goes across his land? If I am understanding gazzer's post then he can't, yes? If so then Bradford council needs to get the sign removed from the path at the bottom of Morris Jackson's Field, and the farmer should be spoken to about the abuse he gave to a family with children, pushing their bikes along the footpath. |
|
| Peter |
I appreciate your problem but... quoteThe above is from Gazzer's post, it is the description of a pavement, so is my post that far off topic? |
|
| midway |
The land owner has the right to stop anyone riding or pushing a cycle on a footpath that crosses his land, but not on a bridle way. Whilst it may not be a criminal offence to cycle on a footpath, it is still a civil one (tresspass) and as bicycle is not classed as a 'usual accompaniment' in law (even when pushed) there is no defensible argument for being found with a bike on a public footpath. |
|
| grandad |
So what if a family were out with a pram? |
|
| grandad |
Peter, the topic is public footpath, not pavement. Any vehicle that is parked on a pavement and thereby causes an obstruction, is committing an offence, it is not an offence to park on a pavement. |
|
| midway |
Try this link grandad,it could help. www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/rights-of-way-law-in-england-and-wales/basics-of-rights-of-way-law.aspx |
|
| gazzer |
Something on BBC Breakfast at about 8-50 this morning about cycles and public footpaths if you are quick you might just catch it |
|
| dogcatcher |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) cycling allowed on footpaths in scotland,but the english cycling body are pushing for it in england,that was on the breakfast show '  '); no different really as they already go on them and cut round red lights etc ' '); |
|
| grandad |
Thanks guys, I did see this mornings news item, it didn't really address my question, I wasn't interested in a person riding a bike on a footpath, it was can somebody push on to get from one road to another. |
|
| midway |
grandad your original question was, Can a cyclist legally use a footpath; if they are pushing the cycle? Please define footpath, for example is it a pavement, as we know is a footpath at each side of a road, or a footpath that crosses private land. |
|
| Replies in this thread : 14 |
|
events sale / wanted general have your say looking for.. skippy greengrass |
|
DON'T FORGET THE SUBJECT IS >>>>>>>> Forums Home > General Forum > Public Footpaths |
|||
|
<< HOME PAGE < RETURN ^ PAGE TOP ^ | ||
 |
|||
|
webenquiries to |
||
30/05/2016 : 21:05:09 
31/05/2016 : 08:04:57