This is the signage at the start of the Mt Pisa walking, cycle and horse easement (December 2016), despite no such restrictions in the registered public access easement.
QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED (apply to all easements ex tenure review in South Island. Not just Mt Pisa Stn case)
On the nature of public access easements:
1. Is "any member of the public" an owner of the dominant tenement?
[ A significant feature of these easements is that “any member of the public” is the Transferee, along with the Crown.]
2. Does the extinguishment, realignment or modification of easements established via the Crown Pastoral Land Act and Conservation Act require the consent of every owner of the dominant tenement i.e. "any member of the public”?
3. Is the LINZ stipulation that section 7(2) Conservation Act applies being omitted when easements are registered against titles? Would s 7(2) still apply if omitted?
4. Are signs saying "no entry", "authorised entry only" , "Danger No Entry", "Stop No Unauthorised Entry", or "trespassers will be prosecuted” actionable interferences?
5. Are structures that allow pedestrian passage, but not horses or vehicles, interferences when the latter users are within the terms of an easement?
6. Is there an obligation on the Crown Transferee to remove signs and physical obstructions erected by a land owner?
7. Is the Crown (DOC) entitled to erect obstructions?
8. Can any member of the public take legal action including abatement against an obstructor, land owner or the Crown?
9. Can any member of the public remove an obstruction? If so what procedures must to used? (akin to common law right of assertion of right of passage over public roads).
10. If an obstruction was in existence at the time of granting of an easement, is there any obligation on the Crown Transferee to remove this?
11. Any right to deviate past a substantial interference/ obstruction?
12. Can any member of the public force the Crown to acquire land as sole owner in case of substantial, on-going interference by servient owner?
13. Does non-use by the owners of a dominant tenement amount to abandonment?
A period of non-use required?
Or an intention to extinguish/abandon, as implied by actions by DOC?
14. 'Appurtenant to' or 'in gross': any material effect on public standing or rights?
15. Is there any obligation on DOC to mark and define a public access easement?
It appears that Michael Laws just can’t help himself with unsubstantiated claims (Central Otago News, 1 December). He states “the easement negotiated between Doc and Mt Pisa Station in 2003 barred armed hunters from using the Mt Pisa public easement”.
I invite readers to settle this for themselves.
Go to: http://www.linz.govt.nz/.../status-and-location.../mt-pisa-i. Then select the Execution Copy of the final Substantive Proposal agreement. It is entitled 'mt-pisa-substantive-proposal-pt 1.pdf'. Easements are from page 28 on.
Due to the unlikelihood of receiving legal advice before the summer holidays the appeal has been extended to 31 January 2017
