Council blames mounting legal fees for decision to end village green legal battle
Bristol City Council is to stop contesting a legal challenge to a committee decision over the village green status of land proposed for a new stadium for Bristol City Football Club.
The move came after Mr Justice Underhill last month ruled that a fresh judicial review claim over the decision by Bristol’s cross-party public rights of way committee could be brought despite the withdrawal of the original applicant and the new application being months out of time.
The committee decided in June 2011 that only the part of the land at Ashton Vale that was not required for the development – approximately half the site – should be registered as a village green.
The decision went against the recommendation of an independent inspector, who said the land should all be registered.
The development plans have met with strong opposition from members of the local community, but were backed by the football club’s fans.
According to the council, the applicant for judicial review proceedings sought to have:
- The High Court instruct Bristol to consider afresh the non-registration of the Northern part of the site as a town or village green.
- The council immediately register a strip of land at the North-East side of the site as a town or village green, without further reference to the independent inspector, or to the council committee.
In a statement Bristol said: “The council’s decision today is to cease to contest the legal challenge, and therefore accept these outcomes should happen forthwith.”
It added that it had made the decision “so as to avoid further delays and to avoid mounting legal fees”.
Describing the decision as “pragmatic”, Cllr Peter Abraham, chairman of Bristol’s public rights of way committee, said: “I have been saddened and frustrated that the decision of my cross-party committee of elected councillors has been challenged in a seemingly never-ending series of legal challenges.
“This is all the more disappointing as our decision preserved indefinitely 20 acres of land for local people to use as recreational open space, whilst leaving the other half of the land (including the former tip) free for development.”
Philip Hoult