Editing Village green (section)

===England and Wales===
Apart from the general use of the term, ''village green'' has a specific legal meaning in England and Wales, and also includes the less common term ''town green''. Town and village greens were defined in the [[Commons Registration Act 1965]], as amended by the [[Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000]], as land:
# which has been allotted by or under any act for the exercise or recreation of the inhabitants of any locality
# or on which the inhabitants of any locality have a customary right to indulge in lawful sports and pastimes
# or if it is land on which for not fewer than twenty years a significant number of the inhabitants of any locality, or of any neighbourhood within a locality, have indulged in lawful sports and pastimes as of right.

Registered greens in England and Wales are now governed by the [[Commons Act 2006]], but the fundamental test of whether land is a town and village green remains the same. Thus land can become a village green if it has been used for twenty years without force, secrecy or request (''nec vi, nec clam, nec precario'').<ref>For a discussion of the law on this, see Austen-Baker, R. and Mayfield, B.,"Uncommon Confusion: Parallel Jurisprudence in Town and Village Green Applications" [2012] Conveyancer 55.</ref> Village green legislation is often used to try to frustrate development. Recent case law (''Oxfordshire County Council vs Oxford City Council and Robinson'')<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2006/25.html |title=Oxfordshire County Council v. Oxford City Council & Ors (2005) and others [2006&#93; UKHL 25 (24 May 2006) |publisher=Bailii.org |access-date=14 September 2009}}</ref> makes it clear that registration as a green would render any development which prevented continuing use of the green as criminal activity under the [[Inclosure Act 1857]] and the [[Commons Act 1876]] ([[39 & 40 Vict.]] c. 56). This leads to some most curious areas being claimed as village greens, sometimes with success. Recent examples include a bandstand,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.iwight.com/council/committees/Human%20Resources%20and%20Misc%20Appeals/1-9-06/Paper%20B.htm|title=Error}}</ref> two lakes<ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-west-wales-14043544 |title= Llyn Maelog lake on Anglesey given village green status |date=7 July 2011 |work=BBC News |access-date=7 July 2011}}</ref> and a beach.<ref>[2013] EWCA Civ 276</ref>

On 11 December 2019, a Supreme Court decision put the future of some village greens at risk in England and Wales. The case involved five fields (13 hectares) in south Lancaster, the Moorside Fields, owned by Lancashire County Council. The lands had been available for public use for over 50 years. According to the Commons Act 2006, land used for informal recreation for at least 20 years can be registered as green and is then protected from development. (Granted, the [[Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013]] specified that land designated for planning applications could not be registered as a village green, but that did not apply in the Moorside Fields case.)

The Moorside Fields Community Group attempted to register the lands in 2016 under the Commons Act 2006. The local authority challenged the registration, wanting to retain control of the lands for future expansion of the nearby Moorside Primary School's playing fields. The council's challenge failed in the High Court and then in the Court of Appeal; the registration of the land as a village green could proceed.<ref>{{cite news|title='Village green' land at risk after ruling by supreme court|date=24 April 2018|url=https://www.lancasterguardian.co.uk/news/lancaster-moorside-fields-will-remain-village-green-299459|work=Lancaster Guardian|access-date=15 December 2019|quote=The future of a Lancaster village green has been secured after its registration was upheld in court.}}</ref> Lancashire County Council subsequently appealed to the UK Supreme Court.

In the appeal decision, cited as ''R (on the application of Lancashire County Council) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Respondent)'' the court overturned the previous judgments. At the same time, the Supreme Court also ruled against the registration of lands in a separate case in [[Surrey]] involving the 2.9 hectare Leach Grove Wood at [[Leatherhead]], owned by the [[National Health Service]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.slcc.co.uk/village-greens-in-the-balance-warns-open-spaces-society/ |title=Village Greens In The Balance Warns Open Spaces Society |date=11 July 2019 |publisher=Society of Local Council Clerks|access-date=15 December 2019 |quote="The question common to both cases was whether the fact that the land was held by a public body for the performance of its statutory powers and duties (by Lancashire County Council and the NHS in these instances) made the land incapable of being registered as a town or village green. Registration requires local people to have used the land for informal recreation for 20 years 'as of right', ie without being stopped or asking permission."}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/property/404-property-news/42188-supreme-court-allows-appeals-by-land-owning-public-bodies-in-dispute-over-statutory-incompatibility-and-village-green-registration |title=Supreme Court allows appeals by land-owning public bodies in dispute over statutory incompatibility and village green registration |date=11 December 2019 |publisher=Local Government Lawyer|access-date=15 December 2019 |quote=[2019] UKSC 58}}</ref>  After publication of the decision in the Moorside Fields case, Lancashire County Council told the news media that the court had "protect[ed] this land for future generations".<ref>{{cite news|title='Village green' land at risk after ruling by supreme court|date=14 December 2019|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/14/village-green-land-at-risk-supreme-court-moorside-fields-lancaster|work=The Guardian|access-date=15 December 2019}}</ref>

In effect, the Supreme Court decision left lands owned by public authorities by their statutory powers open to development for any purpose that they deem to be appropriate.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/uk/insights/news/wbd-advises-nhs-property-services-supreme-court-win-village-green-case |title=WBD advises NHS Property Services on Supreme Court win for village green case |date=11 December 2019 |publisher=Womble Bond Dickinson |access-date=15 December 2019 |quote=the case has wide implications for land held for statutory purposes by public authorities.}}</ref> This could have far-reaching ramifications in England and Wales, according to the [[Open Spaces Society]], a national conservation group that was founded in 1865. A representative made this comment to ''[[The Guardian]]'': "This is a deeply worrying decision as it puts at risk countless publicly owned green spaces which local people have long enjoyed, but which, unknown to them, are held for purposes which are incompatible with recreational use".<ref>{{cite news|title='Village green' land at risk after ruling by supreme court|date=14 December 2019|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/14/village-green-land-at-risk-supreme-court-moorside-fields-lancaster|work=The Guardian|access-date=15 December 2019|quote="I think that this judgment totally redefines the way we understand land held in the public domain,” Bebbington said. “It affects every piece of land held by a statutory body, for example by the MoD, the NHS and local authorities."}}</ref>