New regulations made under EU rules to maintain farmlands in good agricultural and environmental condition are under attack in the High Court.
Suffolk farmer Mark Horvath is seeking to quash environment minister Margaret Beckett’s decision to extend the regulations, within England, to protect footpaths and bridleways.
He claims that the move is aimed at shifting responsibility for the footpaths, many of which fall under the jurisdiction of local highway authorities, to the farming community.
The Common Agricultural Policy Single Payment and Support Schemes (Cross Compliance)(England) Regulations 2004, which came into force in January 2005, stop farmers from “disturbing the surface of a visible footpath or bridleway” so as to make it “inconvenient” to be used as a public right of way.
Farmers are also prohibited from wilfully obstructing free passage “along a visible highway” on their land, and must maintain stiles and gates so that public access is not obstructed.
Horvath, the managing partner of a family farm at Worlingworth, near Woodbridge, alleges that the regulations put farmers at a competitive disadvantage because they do not apply in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or any other EU country.
He also argues that the regulations mean farmers face a “double whammy” a failure to maintain paths may not only result in the imposition of fines but can also affect the level of payments received under the government’s farming income support scheme.
Barrister Maurice Sheridan said: “What the government is doing, but only for England, is adding to the regulations what is not for the agricultural or environmental condition of the land but is to promote access to the countryside and encourage people to stay longer so they spend money in the rural environment.”
He said that while that might be a “laudable object”, it was not right “to try to extend the rural economy by making farmers pay for it”.
“Many of these footpaths come under local highway authorities in terms of upkeep, and this is basically a method to shift responsibility from those authorities,” he added.
Government lawyers argue that the regulations are legitimate and do no more than require farmers to meet their pre-existing legal obligation to maintain rights of way.
Crane J has reserved his decision in the case. If he decides that it raises potentially important issues of European Community law, he may choose to refer it to the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.
Horvath v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Administrative Court (Crane J) 3 May 2006.
