Decision

On 1 August 2025, a completed nomination form for Assets of Community Value submitted under section 89 of the Localism Act 2011 by the Witley and Milford Parish Council. The owners and occupier were provided with notice of the ACV nomination and a chance to comment by way of notice sent by first class mail on 20 October 2025. Neither the owners nor the occupier responded to the notice and neither commented on the nomination.

On 5 December 2025, the Assistant Director of Legal Services & Information Governance published their decision to continue The Dog and Pheasant as an Asset of Community Value on its List of Assets of Community Value.

On 31 March 2026, the owners of the asset submitted a listing review request under section 92 of the Localism Act 2011 asking the Council to review its decision to include the Dog and Pheasant in the list.
The Council has reviewed its decision in accordance with the Act and Schedule 2 of the Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012.

The Joint Strategic Director of Economy, Planning and Place determined on the 20 July 2026 to confirm the Council’s decision for the same reasons set out therein.

Reasons for the decision

I have carefully considered (i) the contents of the Listing Decision, (ii) the community nomination, (iii) the statutory criteria; and (iv) the representations received. Having regard to the Act and the Regulations:

Firstly, I am satisfied that Milford and Witley Parish Council are eligible to nominate the Dog and Pheasant as an Asset of Community Value and that the nomination is considered to be a “community nomination” for the purposes of section 89(1) of the Localism Act 2011 as it complies with the provisions of Regulation 6 of the Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012.

Secondly, with reference to the statutory criteria set out in section 88(2) of the Localism Act 2011, the Dog and Pheasant can be regarded as ‘land of community value’ if, in the opinion of the local authority, the following requirements are met:

(a) There is a time in the recent past when an actual use of a building or other land that was not ancillary use furthered the social wellbeing or interests of the local community;

The Dog & Pheasant was originally built as a Hall house (now Public House), in the late 15th/early 16th century. It was altered and extended in the 1930's and then first listed (entry number: 1096968) as a Grade II listed building on 28 October 1986. The pub stopped trading in July 2025 however, it is reasonable to conclude that it had been used as such in the “recent past” given the length of time it was previously in use.

There is an established precedent for public houses being assets of community value to meet the requirement of use that furthered social wellbeing or interests of the local community and in light of the Dog and Pheasant’s long-standing use as a public house, I am satisfied that this aspect of the test is met.

(b) It is realistic to think that there is a time in the next five years when there could be non-ancillary use of the building or other land that would further (whether or not in the same way as before) the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community.
Case law establishes that the threshold and standard of whether it is “realistic to think” that social wellbeing or social interests will continue in five years is low and to be in the opinion of the decision maker.

As part of the nomination by Milford and Witley Parish Council, a property listing was provided showing both the freehold and leasehold ownership for sale. The nomination did not include any strategy for the reopening of a new pub however, there appears to be strong local support for the initiative to rescue the pub through fundraising and the development of an operational business plan with financial forecasts to confirm the viability of the pub and establish the extent of building works required to support the operation, including planning for a three-phase programme of works to improve the asset and increase its viability.

In addition, the nomination form describes how the asset functioned as a “hub for the community” by advertising local events and businesses, hosting community groups sporting events and offering facilities to the residents in a strategically well-placed location opposite the village hall and cricket green, supporting a finding that the pub furthered the social wellbeing and social interest of the community.
As such, I am satisfied that it is realistic to think there could be a time in the next five years that the property could realistically operate to serve the community again.

Alternative options considered

None as it is a statutory duty to determine the listing review.