1. We can only speculate as to the reasons for Hampshire County Council’s volte face, but whatever they were we can say that it was not a compromise but criminal. This is because their ‘settlement’ was totally contrary to the judgement of Brightman J. in the High Court and the stated intention of the Court of Appeal.

2. The Appeal Court may not allow anything perverse or against the public interest and yet all that could be seen was that the hard-won battles against Mr Whitfield’s ‘cause’, to possess as much of Broxhead Common as he could, had not even resulted in the removal of the unauthorised fencing. So why had the Appeal Court granted the dismissal on the terms of the Schedule?

3. In fact, in the terms of the Schedule, the Court of Appeal had made certain that if the intention had been to keep the fencing around the 80 acres, then application from the Secretary of State under Sec. 194 of the Law of Property Act 1925, was a requirement. The expectation would have been that Hampshire County Council as the Commons Registration Authority would insist on its prompt removal otherwise.
   Broxhead Consent Order CA 197802072017.pdf with page 3

4. On page 3, paragraph 2 of the Schedule, it also required Mr Whitfield to consent to all proceedings in the Aldershot County Court being dismissed with no Order. This meant the decision of the Chief Commons Commissioner must stand, as already confirmed on the first page of the Consent Order. Therefore, and without question, all fencing must be removed. [see part 70 of this series).

5. So, the Appeal Court had not heard the case but dismissed it on the terms of the Schedule, just as Brightman J. had warned.

6. Because of the way it had been presented by HCC, these facts would not be known for another 30 years and one of the main reasons it had not been picked up in the meantime was that page 3 of the Consent Order had been removed! This was the page that states that the case was dismissed from out of the Court of Appeal and was therefore not heard. It could not be seen that no evidence had been considered and therefore no Orders made.

Next time: Extracts from the minutes of Headley Parish Council
Claims

All 'TCHCC' Parts so far