Subscribe to updates
You'll receive weekly summaries about Northumberland Council every week.
If you have any requests or comments please let us know at community@opencouncil.network. We can also provide custom updates on particular topics across councils.
Rights of Way Committee - Wednesday, 17th June, 2026 10.00 am
June 17, 2026 at 10:00 am Rights of Way Committee View on council websiteSummary
Open Council Network is an independent organisation. We report on Northumberland and are not the council. About us
The Rights of Way Committee is scheduled to convene to consider several applications to review the Definitive Map and Statement of Public Rights of Way. The committee will examine evidence regarding the existence of public vehicular rights over various routes, with a particular focus on alleged Byways Open to All Traffic in the parishes of Bamburgh and Rothley.
Review of Alleged Byway Open to All Traffic No. 21, Parish of Bamburgh
The committee is scheduled to consider evidence concerning public vehicular rights over Public Footpath No. 21 in the Parish of Bamburgh. This route runs between the northern end of Byway Open to All Traffic No. 20 at Fowberry and the western end of Byway Open to All Traffic No. 22 at Greenhill. This matter has been the subject of previous reviews and legal challenges, with new evidence now being presented for consideration. The report pack indicates that the committee will be asked to agree that there is insufficient evidence to show that public vehicular or bridleway rights exist over the route D-C.
Review of Alleged Byway Open to All Traffic No. 17, Parish of Rothley
A significant portion of the meeting is expected to be dedicated to reviewing evidence related to alleged Byway Open to All Traffic No. 17 in the Parish of Rothley. The committee is scheduled to consider the U4053 road, which runs between the C162 road and the B6342 road, passing through Tuthill/High Hartington and Gallows Hill. The report pack suggests that the committee will be recommended to agree that there is sufficient evidence to indicate that public vehicular rights have been reasonably alleged to exist over the route T to U, and that these rights have not been extinguished by the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 20061. It is proposed that this section of the route be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as a byway open to all traffic.
Review of Alleged Byway Open to All Traffic No. 18, Parish of Rothley
The committee is also scheduled to review evidence concerning alleged Byway Open to All Traffic No. 18 in the Parish of Rothley. This concerns the U4054 road, running from the B6342 road, west of Tuthill, via Low Fairnley, to Fairnley. The report pack indicates that the committee will be asked to agree that there is sufficient evidence to show that public vehicular rights have been reasonably alleged to exist over the route V-W, and that these rights have not been extinguished by the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 20062. However, it is proposed that there is insufficient evidence to show public vehicular rights over the section W-Y, and that any such rights over the W-Y part of the route would have been extinguished by the Act. Consequently, it is recommended that the V-W section be included in a future Definitive Map Modification Order as a byway open to all traffic, and the W-Y section be recorded as a restricted byway.
-
The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (NERC Act 2006) had a significant impact on the recording of byways open to all traffic based on historical documentary evidence. Under section 67 of the Act, existing, but unrecorded, public rights of way for mechanically propelled vehicles were extinguished unless specific 'saving' provisions applied. ↩
-
The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (NERC Act 2006) had a significant impact on the recording of byways open to all traffic based on historical documentary evidence. Under section 67 of the Act, existing, but unrecorded, public rights of way for mechanically propelled vehicles were extinguished unless specific 'saving' provisions applied. ↩