Solicitor who put a 4ft barricade across path loses war with walkers
A SOLICITOR who erected a barricade outside her home after a decades-long dispute about access to an ancient pathway has lost her legal case.
Sine Garvie-McInally put up 4ft wooden stakes smeared in greasy anti-climbing paint on the heritage route, claiming she had a ‘right to privacy’.
People were staring in the windows, shouting abuse at her and urinating outside the garden, she claimed.
But a planning inspector has now ruled against her after documents showed the path in the tiny Norfolk hamlet of Newton by Castle Acre had existed since the 18th century.
Inspector Paul Freer, who held a hearing over the dispute in November, said that the path must be free to use under the legal maxim: ‘Once a highway, always a highway.’ Mrs Garvieers
McInally, a former solicitor for Norfolk County Council, had threatened to sell her home if she lost the case.
Villagers celebrated the decision yesterday, with one neighbour saying: ‘It should never have gone this far. People have been using the path for ever.’
Meanwhile Richard May, the chairman of Norfolk Area Ramblers, said he was ‘absolutely delighted’, adding: ‘We were always reasonably confident, but one thing we’ve learned is these enquiries can always turn up surprises.’
The 450ft path forms part of the Nar Valley Way, a 33-mile walking trail, and passes Mrs Garvie-McInally’s cottage.
It was not recorded as a right of way in 1968 when a review was carried out of the county’s byways, leaving its status uncertain. Walkers and horseridcontinued to use it, but questions were raised in 2000 when signs appeared on the route, preventing vehicles from driving along it.
Nine years later, a group of riders complained about the notices and their access to the path in the hamlet, which has fewer than 100 residents and was mentioned in the Domesday Book in 1086.
Mrs Garvie- McInally, who moved to the area with her family in 1993, then revived previous objections she had made about its status. She put up the 4ft barrier in August 2020, alongside warning signs that CCTV cameras were monitoring the path.
Norfolk Area Ramblers and other villagers asked the council to register the route as a public right of way and their request was approved in 2021.
Mrs Garvie- McInally then lodged an appeal with the Planning Inspectorate. During the hearing last year, she argued the path lies on ‘excepted land’ under the Countryside Rights of Way Act because it is within 20 metres of her home. ‘I’m doing what I can to protect my home – this order would break my statutory right to privacy,’ she said.
‘People can see straight into my windows from the path. Men walking on the path have urinated outside my garden. I have suffered harassment and had rude comments and gestures made at me.’
However, maps were provided to the Planning Inspectorate that showed the path in use as far back as 1774.
Julie Whales, 67, who lives in nearby Great Dunham, said she had ‘walked, cycled and horse ridden this route for numerous years’, adding that her husband had ‘used it since he was a young lad’. Artist Helen Breach also said she had been ‘using this track for 40-odd years’.
In his ruling, Inspector Freer wrote: ‘Having found that the restricted byway is deemed to subsist [a legal term meaning to remain in effect], the legal maxim of “once a highway, always a highway” applies.’
Mrs Garvie-McInally has six weeks to lodge an appeal at the High Court. She was contacted for comment.
‘People have used this path for ever’