Beaches are capable of being registered as "village greens", a High Court judge declared today.
But the ruling was no comfort to the users of the West Beach at Newhaven, East Sussex, which was involved in a test case that clarified the law.
Mr Justice Ouseley, sitting in London, said the words used by Parliament "to define 'town or village green' are broad enough to permit the registration of a tidal beach", provided certain tests were met.
The ruling could have an impact on many beaches around the country.
But the judge quashed the registration of the West Beach as a village green by East Sussex County Council because it fell within the port area of Newhaven.
The judge held that village green status was "incompatible with the statutory purpose for which the land is held".
His ruling was a victory for the beach owner, Newhaven Port and Properties Ltd, which argued that the registration should be quashed because it had always been clear that the beachwas a working area of the port.
A spokesman for East Sussex County Council said: "We are disappointed with the High Court decision and we will now be looking in detail at the ruling before we can make a decision on how to proceed."
Today's ruling is the culmination of a battle between local people and the owners, who fenced off the beach in 2008 for health and safety reasons.
Newhaven Town Council pressed for the beach to be reclassified as part of a campaign to get the sands reopened for public use.
To qualify for village green status, it had to show the stretch of foreshore, covering 15 acres at low water mark, had been used by local residents for "legitimate sports or pastimes" for at least 20 years.
People scoured their photo albums for proof and recalled that, on Christmas Day 1974, the beach doubled up as a sports ground.
They produced proof of people fishing, walking, riding their bikes and playing cricket on the sands when the tide allowed.
Public inquiry inspector Ruth Stockley, who conducted an inquiry in July 2010, recommended the registration be accepted, and it was approved by the county council's commons and village green registration panel in December 2010.
Charles George QC, appearing for the port authority, argued at a four-day hearing last November that the registration of a tidal beach as a village green was "absurd" and was the result of applying a literal interpretation to section 15 of the Commons Act 2006, which could not have been intended by Parliament.
Mr George said the inappropriateness of the move was illustrated by the fact that all similar tidal beaches around the coast of England and Wales would be potentially registrable in the same way.
He said: "The true situation is that it never crossed anyone's mind that Bournemouth beach or Brighton beach might be village greens."
Today Mr Justice Ouseley rejected his arguments, saying: "I can see no answer to the contention that the ordinary meaning of the words used by Parliament to define 'town or village green' are broad enough to permit the registration of a tidal beach, providing that the nature, quality and duration of the recreational user satisfies the statutory test."
The judge said: "Parliament has chosen its words, on three occasions, so as to exclude any notion of a requirement that the registered green be 'grassy' or 'traditional'.
"There is no need for such words to be implied to avoid absurdity or to give effect to a clearly-ascertained Parliamentary purpose.
"The nature, quality and duration of use was crucial: the quality of the land was unimportant."
- More about:
- Derby County
- East Sussex
- Human Rights
- Judges (court Of Law)
- Loftus Road Stadium
- Olympic Stadium