The Countryside and Rights of Way Panel of Staffordshire Council met on Friday 8 May 2026 to consider two applications for the addition of public footpaths. The panel decided to refuse one application and accept another, ordering the addition of a new public footpath to the definitive map.

Application for an Alleged Public Footpath at Fair Oak, Eccleshall

The panel considered an application for the addition of a public footpath between Lodge Lane and Lungard Lane in Eccleshall. The claimed route, which had been applied for in 1994, was based on evidence of public use dating back to the early 1900s. However, officers concluded that the legal tests for establishing a public footpath had not been satisfied.

The primary challenge identified was the quality and consistency of the user evidence. Many of the submitted forms were incomplete, unsigned, or undated, significantly reducing their evidential weight. Furthermore, there were inconsistencies between earlier and later evidence regarding obstructions and the exact line of the route. While some Ordnance Survey maps showed a physical presence of a path, they did not confirm its public status. Landowner evidence also presented difficulties, particularly for the section between C and D, where landowners reported fences and locked gates that would have prevented access, yet these obstructions were not mentioned by users.

After careful consideration of all the evidence, including statutory tests under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and common law principles of inferred dedication, officers recommended that the application be refused. The panel agreed with this recommendation and voted to refuse the application, concluding that the evidence was insufficient to support a reasonable allegation that a public footpath subsisted along the claimed route.

Application for the Addition of a Public Footpath between Public Footpath 50 Rushton Spencer and Dial Lane Link (D1073) in Rushton Parish

The panel then considered an application for the addition of a public footpath between Public Footpath 50, Rushton Spencer, and the Dial Lane Link (D1073) in Rushton Parish. The claimed route, shown between points B and C on the provided map, was supported by a combination of documentary and user evidence.

Officers recommended that the application be accepted, and an order be made to add the alleged public footpath to the definitive map and statement. While the claimed route did not appear on Ordnance Survey maps or the first definitive map, there were several historic references, including a Manchester Guardian article from 1937 and Congleton Borough Council minutes from the same year, which were considered indicative of a route broadly corresponding to the claimed alignment.

Crucially, officers determined that while the statutory test under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980 was not satisfied due to a lack of 20 years of uninterrupted use within the relevant challenge period, the common law principles of inferred dedication were met. A core group of eight users were found to have used the route openly and without force or permission over a prolonged period from the mid-1930s to around 1970. This use was deemed to be of sufficient frequency to have reasonably come to the notice of landowners at the time, with no clear evidence of effective landowner action to challenge or prevent such use until around 1970.

Despite detailed objections from landowners, elected members, and the National Farmers Union, officers maintained that evidence of non-use, the presence of alternative routes, or potential costs and disruption were not relevant considerations for the panel at this stage. The panel was reminded that their role was to assess the evidence and determine if the legal tests for the existence of a public right-of-way were met.

After considering all the evidence, including objections and officer responses, the panel voted to accept the application. The recommendation to make an order to add the alleged public footpath to the definitive map and statement was successful. The width of the route was determined to be a minimum of one metre.