This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/scotland/tayside_and_central/7362539.stm

The article has changed 20 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 18 Version 19
Tycoon loses right-to-roam battle Tycoon loses right-to-roam battle
(10 minutes later)
A millionaire landowner has lost his bid to ban ramblers from entering his 70-acre estate in Stirlingshire.A millionaire landowner has lost his bid to ban ramblers from entering his 70-acre estate in Stirlingshire.
Waste disposal magnate Euan Snowie had wanted the Boquhan Estate in Kippen exempt from the 2003 Land Reform Act's right-to-roam provisions.Waste disposal magnate Euan Snowie had wanted the Boquhan Estate in Kippen exempt from the 2003 Land Reform Act's right-to-roam provisions.
Stirling Council and the Ramblers' Association fought the case.Stirling Council and the Ramblers' Association fought the case.
Sheriff Andrew Cubie said the land sought by the pursuer to be excluded from the act was excessive. Mr Snowie, 39, purchased the estate in 2001.Sheriff Andrew Cubie said the land sought by the pursuer to be excluded from the act was excessive. Mr Snowie, 39, purchased the estate in 2001.
In his ruling, Sheriff Cubie said only a small amount of land adjacent to Boquhan House would be inaccessible to the public.In his ruling, Sheriff Cubie said only a small amount of land adjacent to Boquhan House would be inaccessible to the public.
The decision comes after bus tycoon Ann Gloag won the right to restrict access to her property in June last year.The decision comes after bus tycoon Ann Gloag won the right to restrict access to her property in June last year.
READ THE RULING Snowie v Stirling Council & Ramblers' Association - Final Judgement [115KB] Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader Download the reader hereREAD THE RULING Snowie v Stirling Council & Ramblers' Association - Final Judgement [115KB] Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader Download the reader here
The case, which was the first of its kind, granted her the right to keep the public out of 10 acres of her grounds at Kinfauns Castle near Perth.The case, which was the first of its kind, granted her the right to keep the public out of 10 acres of her grounds at Kinfauns Castle near Perth.
Mr Snowie and his neighbours on the estate, Lindsay and Barbara Ross, had claimed their privacy and security were compromised by "right-to-roam" laws.Mr Snowie and his neighbours on the estate, Lindsay and Barbara Ross, had claimed their privacy and security were compromised by "right-to-roam" laws.
In evidence, Mr Snowie had previously told Stirling Sheriff Court he had encountered "boisterous youths" on the estate.In evidence, Mr Snowie had previously told Stirling Sheriff Court he had encountered "boisterous youths" on the estate.
In response, the western gate to Boquhan House was closed to ramblers on 19 September 2005.In response, the western gate to Boquhan House was closed to ramblers on 19 September 2005.
The grounds, which includes seven properties, one of which is Boquhan House, also contains a tennis court and riding stables.The grounds, which includes seven properties, one of which is Boquhan House, also contains a tennis court and riding stables.
'Not courteous''Not courteous'
In his submission, Sheriff Cubie characterised Mr Snowie as someone who had "an almost instinctive reluctance to accept that any access taker could be genuine".In his submission, Sheriff Cubie characterised Mr Snowie as someone who had "an almost instinctive reluctance to accept that any access taker could be genuine".
He added: "Mr Snowie's position appeared to be that if someone was not courteous to him then they could not under any circumstance be a genuine recreational walker."He added: "Mr Snowie's position appeared to be that if someone was not courteous to him then they could not under any circumstance be a genuine recreational walker."
Advertisement
Background to the caseBackground to the case
Ramblers Scotland president Dennis Canavan welcomed the court's decision and said it sent a message to all landowners of big estates that the public were allowed access in accordance with the Scottish Outdoor Access Code.Ramblers Scotland president Dennis Canavan welcomed the court's decision and said it sent a message to all landowners of big estates that the public were allowed access in accordance with the Scottish Outdoor Access Code.
He added: "The decision also sends a message to local authorities that access rights apply along driveways and past gatehouses.He added: "The decision also sends a message to local authorities that access rights apply along driveways and past gatehouses.
"There are a number of cases around the country where signs have been erected and gates locked and we hope the authorities will now take action knowing that the courts will back them up.""There are a number of cases around the country where signs have been erected and gates locked and we hope the authorities will now take action knowing that the courts will back them up."
Stirling Council said it had been "vindicated" by the ruling.Stirling Council said it had been "vindicated" by the ruling.
Brian Devlin, the authority's director of environment services, said: "The council had entered into discussions with Mr Snowie and the Rosses to try to reach amicable agreement.Brian Devlin, the authority's director of environment services, said: "The council had entered into discussions with Mr Snowie and the Rosses to try to reach amicable agreement.
"It is unfortunate that those efforts were in vain and that court action had to determine this matter."It is unfortunate that those efforts were in vain and that court action had to determine this matter.
"The judgment is one that will assist the council and the public in appreciating the extent of the rights of individuals whether they wish to exercise their rights, or wish to protect their property from unwarranted interference with privacy.""The judgment is one that will assist the council and the public in appreciating the extent of the rights of individuals whether they wish to exercise their rights, or wish to protect their property from unwarranted interference with privacy."