A bid by Ryhall Parish Council to create a village green is being recommended for refusal. 

Rutland County Council's planning committee will consider the request at its meeting tomorrow (February 18) and officers are recommending the planning committee reject turning the land known as 'field' at Ryhall Meadows into a village green because it does not meet the legal criteria. 

The county council has the power to register the land as a village green if an application shows that residents have used it for 'lawful sports and pastimes' for at least 20 years. 

The parish council made the bid to turn the space into a village green in March last year, but on the last day of the consultation period on September 20, the authority received an objection from the trust that owned the land. This trust – which is not named in the report – had not registered the land then but has since registered it and provided proof of ownership. 

Before the application was made to turn it into a village green, it had been assumed the land had belonged to the village or the tenant farmer. 

The report says: "In order for land to be registered as a town or village green it must meet certain criteria and if not all of these criteria are met, then the land should not be registered as such. In this instance, officer advice is that not all of the criteria are met, as the information that has been submitted shows that use of the land known as field at Ryhall Meadows has been 'by right' rather than 'as of right'." 

The report explains: "Use of the land 'as of right' means without force, secrecy or permission and it is for the party applying to register the land as a town or village green to prove this on the 'balance of probabilities. The use must have continued uninterrupted for the 20-year period. The question of whether a break in the use made by local inhabitants of land for lawful sports and pastimes is sufficient to interrupt their continuous use in the relevant 20-year period is a matter of judgement for the registration authority." 

After hearing arguments from both sides, the officers have come down on the side of the landowner, and say the land was being used by villagers, with permission and it is immaterial whether the users knew they were being allowed to use the land. 

The report says: "This brings about a right of interruption of the 20-year use and, despite there being sound evidence of recreational usage for the period, it fails the 'as of right' test. The use 'as of right' has not therefore continued uninterrupted throughout the claimed 20-year period."   

The committee, which is chaired by Councillor Nick Begy, will have the final say.