Wicklow landowner to appeal right-of-way

A Co Wicklow landowner is appealing a Circuit Court decision that a traditional right-of- way crosses his land in the Glencree Valley.

The High Court is expected to hear the appeal by landowner Neil Collen against the decision in the autumn. The case is widely seen as a test of the rights of walkers to access private land on traditional tracks. Irish law does not automatically recognise public rights-of-way unless they are specifically included in the deeds of a property.

In a separate dispute in Co Sligo, the new owners of Lissadell House are embroiled in a row with locals over public access.

Owners Edward Walsh and Constance Cassidy say they have closed one of the entrances to the property for the safety of their children, but local residents say this route is an established right-of-way.

In the Wicklow case, Circuit Court Judge Bryan McMahon last month granted the chairman of the Enniskerry Walking Association, Niall Lenoach, and any member of public the right to use a track crossing Mr Collen's land known as Lambe's Lane, saying there had been "ample evidence" during an earlier hearing to show the route was a traditional right of way.

He refused an injunction sought by Mr Collen preventing walkers entering his land, which lies between Glencree and Enniskerry, and ordered Mr Collen to pay 70 per cent of Mr Lenoach's costs for the three-day hearing.

Mr Collen's decision to appeal the case means that an interim injunction preventing three parties entering his land remains in force. These parties are Mr Lenoach, Ms Yanni Petters and the North Wicklow Times.

In his judgment, Judge McMahon described as "irrelevant" evidence given by witnesses for Mr Collen that the tranquillity of the area would be disturbed and security issues would arise if the track were declared a right-of-way.

Mr Collen, a director of Collen Construction, accepts that local people traditionally used Lambe's Lane, but denies a public right-of-way existed. Local people gave evidence of seeing hikers on the route back in the 1950s. The judge also pointed to the fact that Ordnance Survey maps from 1835 and 1910 showed a defined track corresponding to the claimed right-of-way.