At NALP we are always looking for ways to support our Learners and every now and again there is a case that is just perfect! Darwall V Dartmoor National Park Authority is one such case.
Why? For anyone who wants a clear and structured guide as to the process to be used when interpreting statutory provisions this case is an absolute must read. Better than that it is clear and easy to understand/follow – not always statements used in relation to case law!
Here, our Academic Director Tom Mortimer, takes a look at the ruling, why it is important, and what you can learn from it to help you in your studies and/or your legal practice work…
Darwall V Dartmoor National Park Authority
You may have heard about the recent case of Darwall V Dartmoor National Park Authority (DNPA) [2025] UKSC 20. The decision was given on 21st May 2025 and was widely reported and discussed – often under the headline ‘the right to roam’.
For those of you completing Unit 1 at Level 3 or 4, for those completing studies of Land Law or for anyone who wants a clear and structured guide as to the process to be used when interpreting statutory provisions this case is an absolute must read. Better than that it is clear and easy to understand/follow – not always statements used in relation to case law!
Below is a brief summary of the key aspects – but this really is a case you should read for yourself. It will help you to understand how statutory interpretation works in practice and will guide you to better understand how this important area of legal practice works.
Brief summary
The provisions at issue were s10(1) of the Dartmoor Commons Act 1985 and specifically whether ‘open air recreation’ covered/allowed wild camping on Dartmoor common land. The appellants (who won in the High Court and lost in the Court of Appeal) contended as a matter of statutory interpretation that the ‘open air recreation’ allowed under the Act had to be in a form carried out on foot or horseback. This argument stemmed from s10(1) which states: ‘…the public shall have the right of access to the common on foot or horseback for the purpose of open air recreation.’
The key points of this legal decision
So, what are the key points?
- The normal principles of statutory interpretation apply (remember the so-called ‘Rules of statutory interpretation’?!)
- Courts in conducting statutory interpretation are seeking to find out the meaning of words used in a statute in light of their context and the purpose of the statutory provision (this you will recall from your studies is often referred to as the ‘Purposive Rule’)
- The Supreme Court (SC) referred to Lord Hodge’s statement of principle, in relation to statutory interpretation, laid down in: R (Project for the registration of children as British Citizens) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKSC 3 which stated the purpose of statutory interpretation is to ‘seek the meaning of the words…Parliament used’. Also to Lord Nicholls in: R v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions ex parte Spath Holme Ltd [2001] 2 AC 349 at 396.
Statutory interpretation
‘Statutory interpretation is an exercise which requires the court to identify the meaning borne by the words in question in the particular context’. Further, ‘they are the words which Parliament has chosen to enact as an expression of the purpose of the legislation and are therefore the primary source by which meaning is ascertained.’
- See particularly the comments at Para 17 (iii) and (iv) which illustrate how the activity of statutory interpretation should be carried out. These are very useful paragraphs on how the tools of statutory interpretation are, and should be, used in practice.
- Para 19 demonstrates how the SC uses the original 1949 Act on this matter (the SC said the 1985 Act changes were not material (significant))
- Para 26 illustrates that ‘open air recreation’ was given a wide interpretation by virtue of the examples listed in Schedule 2 of the 1949 Act demonstrating what the public can and cannot do. This is another good example of how the courts interpret using both the Act and the Schedules to aid that interpretation and to identify the ‘context’.
- Paras 27 and 28 then show how the 1949 and 1985 Act need to be read together and how (this is important!) the method of accessing the common is separate from the interpretation of ‘open air recreation’ – look back at the definition of s10(1) above to see the point being made here and why this separation/distinction is important for the final decision.
- Paras 36-38 then show how the SC used the generic Law of Property Act 1925 (which you will be familiar with – or, if not, you will become familiar with when you study Land Law!) to discuss the purpose of accessing common land – namely, ‘air and exercise’. The SC then argued this was similar to ‘open air recreation’ in the 1985 Act and will have been in the drafters’ minds as part of their research when drafting s10(1).
- In Para 39 the SC refers to:
✓ Hansard as an external aid ü
✓ Pepper v Hart [1993] ALL ER 42
– there is a very good discussion in this case about the nature and purpose of accessing Parliamentary reports (such as Hansard) and how these might be used as an aid to statutory interpretation
✓ The principle of legality and the fact that as Parliament is sovereign it can, where it uses clear and unambiguous words to do so, limit human rights. The argument here was that Parliament had in s10(1) been too general and ambiguous in its words. The SC disagreed on this point.
✓ You will be familiar with the above from your study of statutory interpretation. If you are not (!) you need to become so. But this also demonstrates how these matters you have come across in your learning materials are not just abstract ideas with no relevance to the real world – they are ‘live’, relevant and important. - Paras 48-53 then discuss other Reports which influenced the 1985 Act
- The SC Held: that wild camping (like picnics and rock climbing) were part of ‘open air recreation’ and these did not have to be carried out on foot or horseback. On foot and horseback was simply the means of access to the common.
How this can help your paralegal studies
By reading this recent case, the very helpful dicta and the brief notes above your understanding of the way statutory interpretation works in practice should be significantly enhanced.
This also illustrates why it is important to keep up to date with case law as you go through your studies – and your future practice. Law is a dynamic subject – the above evidences this.
