Commons Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 81B:"Page 10, line 35, at end insert—" ““(   )   A commons registration authority shall be permitted to register the common grazing rights held on the title deeds of the dominant holding as being attached to that holding.”” The noble Lord said: I have brought this amendment to the attention of the Committee, and would like to think that somehow this situation can be corrected. It is an interesting and specific case, though I suspect it may not be the only one. Amendment No. 81B, which has been carefully drafted, states:"““A commons registration authority shall be permitted to register the common grazing rights held on the title deeds of the dominant holding as being attached to that holding””." There is an anomaly, and I regret to have to bring this to the attention to the Committee, in terms of Crown land. A situation has been brought to my attention. The Crown land concerned is a large tract of land with mineral rights on some of it. Common rights were registered as a result of the 1965 Act, but there was a muddle. As I understand it, the Crown land had some of its own grazing rights, but other Crown land was also classified where the dominant holdings had grazing rights on other Crown land. The grazers thought they could not register the grazing rights themselves at that time. In hindsight, which is always easy, they now realise they could have done so. In law, there is no question that these rights are proved by being recorded on the title deeds of the property. There are other instances of this occurring. It is particularly unjust that some common-right holders have, as a result of their non-registration of their non-registration of their grazing rights, subsequently been treated as tenants of the Crown, and have been required to pay rent annually even though the rights are registered on their title deeds. This has amounted in some cases to thousands of pounds per annum over the last ““x”” number of years since this occurred in the late 1960s. We feel that this situation could be resolved amicably and without recrimination, possibly by the deed right holders bringing forward a bond that could be redeemed, as an indication of their commitment to getting some form of justice in this respect. I draw the Committee’s attention to this situation because it has been drawn to mine, and I was unaware of it. It would be good to think it could be resolved. After all, these people have those grazing rights in the title of their dominant holding. I beg to move.