Landowners don't have right to kick wild campers off Dartmoor

Telegraph

21-05-2025

Landowners do not have the right to kick wild campers off Dartmoor, the Supreme Court has ruled.
Five justices unanimously ruled on Wednesday that the public has the right to wild camp in the national park in Devon.
They said that the term 'recreation' in the law governing the use of Dartmoor is used 'without qualification as to the form which it should take'.
Two landowners, Alexander and Diana Darwall, had challenged a Court of Appeal ruling at the UK's highest court, which said the law allows the public to camp on the Dartmoor Commons, provided bylaws are followed.
Mr and Mrs Darwall keep cattle on Stall Moor, which forms part of their more than 3,450-acre estate in the southern part of the national park.
The case concerned the interpretation of the Dartmoor Commons Act 1985, which says 'the public shall have the right of access to the commons on foot and on horseback for the purpose of open-air recreation' on the commons.
Their lawyers told the Supreme Court last October that some campers cause problems to livestock and the environment, and that the law only gives the public access on foot and horseback, 'which naturally means walking and riding'.
'Absurd'
The Dartmoor National Park Authority (DNPA) opposed the challenge, with its lawyers labelling the suggestion that erecting a tent could damage land and vegetation 'absurd'.
In their judgment, Lords Sales and Stephens said the law would make 'no sense' if the right of recreation given to the public was 'limited in the manner contended for' by the Darwalls, and that the concept of 'open-air recreation' was 'wide'.
They said in a ruling backed by Lord Reed, Lady Rose and Lady Simler: 'The word 'recreation' is used here without qualification as to the form which it should take.
'It is not confined to recreation taken by means of walking or riding.'
Dartmoor National Park, designated in 1951, covers a 368-square-mile area which features 'commons' – areas of unenclosed, privately-owned moorland where locals can put livestock.
In January 2023, High Court Judge Sir Julian Flaux ruled that the 1985 Act did not allow people to pitch tents overnight on the Dartmoor commons without landowners' permission.
But campaigners argued the decision 'went too far' and was a 'huge step backwards', and could affect bird-watching, fishing and other activities.
The Court of Appeal overturned the decision in July that year after a challenge by the DNPA, with three senior judges ruling that the law 'confers on members of the public the right to rest or sleep on the Dartmoor commons, whether by day or night and whether in a tent or otherwise'.
Sir Geoffrey Vos said in the judgment that the 'critical question' was whether wild camping could be considered a form of 'open-air recreation', finding it was.
In written submissions for the Supreme Court hearing last year, Timothy Morshead KC, for the Darwalls, said the couple are 'not motivated by a desire to stop camping on Dartmoor'.
But he said: 'Concerns arise from their responsibilities as stewards of the land in their ownership and over which they have commoners' rights: concerns about the damage that wild camping can cause and, in particular, about the significant risk of fire associated with it.'
But barristers for the DNPA said the phrase 'on foot' means 'the access to the commons should be pedestrian and not vehicular'.
In written submissions, Richard Honey KC said: 'The suggestion that merely erecting a tent for backpack or wild camping damages the land and vegetation is absurd.'
Lord Sales and Lord Stephens said in their ruling that the term 'open-air recreation' should be read widely, because otherwise it would 'create an unjustified and unrealistic limit on the park authority's power to repair damage on the commons'.
They continued: 'Whilst there are restrictions on the landowners' property rights, there is in return DNPA's power to prevent, and enforce against, problematic camping by virtue of its ability to make and enforce bylaws and to publish notices.
'Accordingly, the legislation puts in place the means for public regulation of use of the commons, which is in practice likely to be more effective in protecting the land than attempts by private persons to challenge such use through themselves having to confront people on their land and then bring a claim in private law.'
Reacting to the Supreme Court ruling on Dartmoor, Dr Kevin Bishop, chief executive of Dartmoor National Park Authority, said: 'We are delighted and relieved with the Supreme Court's ruling. This is a landmark judgment not just for Dartmoor National Park but for people who have long campaigned for access rights.
'We are enormously grateful to the Open Spaces Society which joined us in our legal action, and Dartmoor Preservation Association for launching a fundraiser to offset legal costs.
'We thank them, and their many supporters, for standing with us. We would also like to thank our legal team: Richard Honey KC and Vivienne Sedgley.
'The judgment reaffirms our long-held belief for the public's right to backpack camp on certain commons and, importantly, our role in regulating and managing that access.
'It is important to note that it is not a blanket right to camp wherever, or do whatever, you want. With the right comes a responsibility to make sure that you tread lightly and leave no trace.'
He continued: 'We have been robust in defending the right to backpack camp, we will be equally robust in ensuring that people exercise that right responsibly and with respect to landowners and farmers.
'If you are thinking of backpack camping on Dartmoor, it is important to follow the guidance on our website. Now is the time to look forward and to work together for the good of Dartmoor.
'We will continue to work with commoners, all landowners, communities and partners to protect Dartmoor's nature, beauty and history while ensuring fair access for all and respect for the natural environment.
'While in opposition, Labour were publicly supportive of our action to defend the right to backpack camp.
'Now they are in government, we hope that they will work with us to ensure that we have the tools and resources to manage responsible access and to look at lessons that can be learnt from the Dartmoor case before they publish the forthcoming Green Paper on access to nature and the countryside.'