Court of Session, 12th May 2009 Court ref: A338/09
In this case, the pursuer claimed that the defenders (who organised commercial rafting) were not exercising access rights responsibly and therefore had no right to undertake this activity on his property, without his agreement. The pursuer successfully obtained an interim interdict to prevent the defender from carrying on further activity of this kind within the boundaries of his estate.
This brief note is included for completeness, but it should be noted that the case was undefended, and it would not be considered binding, or even persuasive, in any other court case. If it had been defended, the outcome might have been different.
Powered by BetterDocs