Equine Law | Equine Lawyer

Three students have been chosen for this year’s Studentship: Sophie Phillips, Emma Green and Lee Cooper.  Senior Partner, Michael Dalton, said that the firm had received a large number of applications of a high calibre but the three students chosen were clearly passionate in their desire to specialise in equine law.

The lucky winners spent the day learning core elements of equine law, including equine contracts, equestrian property transactions and equine disputes. 

The students thorougly enjoyed their day with leading equine lawyer, Sarah Jordan.  Sophie Phillips, who traveled from Stratford to Petersfield for the day said, ‘My studentship day at Daltons was a really fantastic opportunity to explore my passion for equine law further.  I was able to engage in all kinds of equine legal matters from property sales to purchase disputes and ultimately realise what it would be like to practice as an equine lawyer.  The staff at Daltons were exceptionally friendly and welcoming and made me feel completely at home, allowing me to optimise my learning experience.  I really would like to thank Sarah Jordan and Daltons for taking the time to create this unique experience for those who, like myself, are interested in such a specialist area of law.’

Sarah was delighted with the enthusiastic approach the students took with the tasks set them and as a result Daltons are planning to make this an annual national award.

Two interesting cases have come to light in 2010 regarding planning law and equestrian / agricultural buildings:-

1.  Welwyn Hatfield Council v. Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another [2010] EWCA Civ 26.  The Court of Appeal allowed a landowner’s appeal and held that the landowner was entitled to a certificate of lawfulness of existing use or development (CLEUD) for a dwelling house the landowner had hidden within a hay barn he had permission for.  The landowners waited the requisite four years before applying for the CLEUD and by this stage the planners were told by the Court of Appeal that they were too late and the development had acquired immunity from planning enforcement action.  This was the case, even though it was proved that the landowner had deliberately deceived the Council in this respect!

2.  In conflict, Fidler v. Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2010] EWHC 143 , did not get away with deceiving the Council.  The landowner built a house without obtaining planning permission and concealed it behind bales of straw covered with a tarpaulin.  After four years, the landowner removed the straw bales and tarpaulin to reveal the house.  The High Court in this instance held that the erection and removal of the bales and tarpaulin were not building operations in their right and that the landowner had always intended to remove the bales and tarpaulin so, as a matter of fact and degree, their removal was part of the building operations when the totality of the operations as originally contemplated and intended was considered.  Therefore, the property was not immune from enforcement action by the Council  and an order for the demolition of the house was granted.

Sarah Jordan has recently contributed to two Horse & Hound reader questions on their guest expert equine legal question and answer page. See Horse & Hound editions dated 24 December 2009 and 21 January 2010. Sarah’s equine law advice related to the legal responsibilies surrounding hay production and change of planning use issues. Contact Sarah if you would like more details (sarahj@daltons-law.co.uk).