Quizzes & Puzzles63 mins ago
Cchurchways
An old vicarage we have been looking at has this in the additional information 'There is a churchway across the rear of the property allowing people access for the purposes of attending services only'. This is not on any definitive maps and I am guessing it has always been a verbal agreement between the church and the owners of the property. There is a path from the church door to the main road so I don't understand why anyone would need to go across the back garden. Is a churchway classedd in the same way as a footpath or could the homeowner block it?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Budlet. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I would advise anyone considering buying any property near a church, that might be on or have been on church land to get their solicitor to do a chancel check. Although the rules were changed a while ago, I'd want to make sure there definitely were no possible repair liabilities or such - see the link below, which mentions a celebrated case in Aston Cantlow, which went all the way to the House of Lords, but the owners lost, and were found to have to cough up £350,000.
There used to be specialist insurance to cover this sort of thing, which you might still be able to get. Be careful.
https:/ /en.wik ipedia. org/wik i/Chanc el_repa ir_liab ility
There used to be specialist insurance to cover this sort of thing, which you might still be able to get. Be careful.
https:/
I wouldn't advise blocking a churchway, as you could fall foul of both the County Court and the Ecclesiatical Court, resulting in an injunction requiring you to unblock the route. There's case law going all the way back to 1475 giving 'customary rights' to parishioners following long-established paths to access their own church.
I imagine a churchway remains a public right of way, until such time you can prove it to be out of use and maybe make claim on it?
Good advice re chancel ins., we have to have it at our works building.
https:/ /www.go compare .com/ho me-insu rance/c hancel- repair- liabili ty/
Good advice re chancel ins., we have to have it at our works building.
https:/
^^^ A pedantic point maybe but a churchway isn't a 'public right of way'. The only people who can use it are parishioners, together with " . . . their families, guests and servants for passing on foot to and from the parish church . . . "
[Brocklebank v Thompson, 1901]
The position is similar to that which is common with many terraced houses, whereby residents of the properties (together with bona fide visitors to those properties) have the right to cross their neighbour's rear gardens on foot in order to reach the back doors to their homes. The general public have no such rights, so those paths aren't 'public rights of way'.
[Brocklebank v Thompson, 1901]
The position is similar to that which is common with many terraced houses, whereby residents of the properties (together with bona fide visitors to those properties) have the right to cross their neighbour's rear gardens on foot in order to reach the back doors to their homes. The general public have no such rights, so those paths aren't 'public rights of way'.
// and I am guessing it has always been a verbal agreement between the church and the owners of the property.//
is a completely different area of the law
Tulk v Moxhay 1848
I would do a screaming zazu act over this and demand they knock off a few tens of thousands from the price - coz you dont want to be burnt at the stake and so on
( you know - sort of buyer completely out of it act)
is a completely different area of the law
Tulk v Moxhay 1848
I would do a screaming zazu act over this and demand they knock off a few tens of thousands from the price - coz you dont want to be burnt at the stake and so on
( you know - sort of buyer completely out of it act)
Yes, completely agree, misuse of the word public there by me. not a public right of way at all, by as described above.
My thoughts were around it being redundant since the vicarage is no longer in use, and therefore ability to prove no regular use of this route, would over time allow the house owner to apply for a change in status.
My thoughts were around it being redundant since the vicarage is no longer in use, and therefore ability to prove no regular use of this route, would over time allow the house owner to apply for a change in status.
brocklebank is here
https:/ /swarb. co.uk/b rockleb ank-v-t hompson -1903/
and is cited here
https:/ /www.ba ilii.or g/uk/ca ses/UKH L/2006/ 25.html
and appears to be a kinda right of way ( prescriptive right)
https:/
and is cited here
https:/
and appears to be a kinda right of way ( prescriptive right)
Tilly2 - I imagine it was the original shortcut from vicarage to church. What I don't understand is that there is a footpath from the church door to the main road for church users. The churchway goes from the back of the church, through the vicarage garden and onto a private drive. It's twice as long to get to the road. Seems daft.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.