I know what you are saying Hunlef but I think these 60 residents and their court case could generate a lot of media attention as well and public/political sympathy so that any shady use the CPA would be clear for all to see and therefore very damaging for the Duchies reputation.
This kind of court case is what Joe Bloggs loves to read about in his tabloid (much more so than Cornish national minorities I guess) so any such court actions would risk dragging the Duchies constitutional dirty linen out into the 'Sun'.
To avoid this, my bet, is they'll just back down and agree to let them buy just like the Duchy agreed to pay 'Tax', but no laws will have changed and legally it will only be because the Duchy had decided it so.
edited by: Fulub-le-Breton, Sep 04, 2008 - 10:05 AM
That might be so, FLB. However, the fact remains that the CPA will come into play, albeit behind closed doors. It will never, ever be reported. It is more likely that a case will go to court and fail through a perverse judgement or technicality. The court will then instruct the so-called 'free press' what it can publish and what is unacceptable, just as it did in the case involving the organisation known as 'English Heritage' in 2001. The Duchy's rights, property and profits will remain in tact and the case will be history very quickly. Neither the public nor the litigants will know that they will have been well and truly kippered.
It'll be interesting to keep an eye on and if this media friendly case snowballs and generates critical mass publicity then I doubt what you have described above will happen.
Instead the Duchy will make a big fuss of being the best possible landowner and organise some sort of positive publicity.
Just my ideas but lets keep an eye on it and see.
edited by: Fulub-le-Breton, Sep 05, 2008 - 11:35 AM
The case will not come to court. Historically, when the forces of oppression sense trouble, they either crush the protagonists, buy them off or divide and rule. In this case, I suspect the owners will be offered some form of compensation deal, some will take it, others will resist. But the point is, the principle of divide and rule will have worked.
How would any of this be different if the Crown was involved rather than the Duchy? As long as we have a monarchy at least one person will always be above the law.
Has anyone successfully found out how much of the Duke's estate, is 'officially' owned by the Duke? This being the estate he officially makes profit from on a daily basis...
A number of residents in the Isles of Scilly are demanding the right to buy the the homes from the Duchy, the Prince's landed estate, which is refusing because it is excluded from rules which allow tenants to buy the properties they live in from their landlords.
The fight centres on the 16th century walls of the Garrison on St Mary's, the largest of the islands which are 28 miles south-west of Land's End.
It could lead to one of the first court challenges to the authority of the Duchy since it was formed in 1372 by Edward III to generate an income suitable for the heir to the throne.
The Scillonians, as the islanders like to be known, have now consulted lawyers for the first time to examine the legal status of the Duchy of Cornwall. They have also secured the support of Andrew George, the local Liberal Democrat MP, who has submitted a Freedom of Information request to establish why the Duchy was excluded when many other Crown properties are not.
The Duke of Westminster, one of Britain's biggest private landlords, was defeated when he went to court to try to stop leaseholders on his Grosvenor Estate buying the freeholds under the right to buy legislation.
Alan Davis, secretary of the Garrison Leasehold Group, said: "We are campaigning for the same equal right to enfranchisement as other citizens. Our problem is that our landlord is the Duchy of Cornwall.
"The Duchy on its website refers to itself as "a well managed private estate" whose principal activity is the sustainable and commercial management of its land and properties".
"Yet as far as leasehold reform goes, the Duchy lays claim to being part of the Crown, although it is not a Crown Body. While the Crown has specific, understandable and clearly intentioned exemptions applying to properties within the grounds of the Royal Palaces. the same cannot be said of the Duchy of Cornwall which is a commercial estate.
We believe that it is unjust and unfair that the Duchy is able to opt out of this arrangement by virtue of resort to what appears to be feudal privilege or connections in the corridors of power."
The Duchy once owned all the land and properties on the Isles of Scilly but many homes on St Mary's have been sold off so it now owns 330 - just under 30 per cent - of the 1,150 residential properties on the islands.
The Duchy of Cornwall estate, which is spread over 23 counties mainly in the south-west of England, rose in value last year by eight per cent to £647 million. The Prince of Wales's income from the Duchy rose by £1.1 million to £16.3 million.
Mr Davis said: "The Duchy does not like the enfranchisement legalisation and have used their position to claim an exemption. No other freeholder has the right to say no to enfranchisement. Even the Crown will allow it, if it does not impinge on Royal Palaces."
The Duchy is determined that the houses in the Garrison will not be broken-up or fall into private hands so will not sell the freeholds. A spokeswoman said: "
The Prince of Wales upset the 2,000 islanders in 2005 when the Duchy entered the holiday-home business on the islands for the first time. It renovated a granite two-bedroom house that had traditionally been used by local teachers.
Annabel Elliot, the Duchess of Cornwall's sister and an interior designer, was paid from duchy funds to give the cottage an extensive makeover. The Duchy has also imposed Visitor Licence fees - dubbed a bed tax by the locals- on residential tenancies who do holiday lets.
A spokeswoman for the Duchy said: "The Garrison on St Mary's is one of a small number of sites belonging to the Duchy of Cornwall estate that is exempt from the leasehold reform act. In order to preserve the special appearance and nature of this site it was agreed at the time the legislation was introduced, and reinforced by subsequent ministerial statements, that the Duchy would retain the freehold of the properties rather than allow a fragmented approach to their management."
HEREis the Daily Telegraph's version of the background:
'Prince of Wales housing row: The legal case
The right to buy legislation of the Leasehold Reform Act (1967) allows leaseholders to force their landlord to sell them the permanent freehold.
Last Updated: 3:19PM BST 01 Sep 2008
The law, which is separate from that allowing people to buy their council houses, was brought in to help long-term leaseholders trapped with landlords who failed to keep up repairs and look after properties.
It means anyone whose lease term is 21 years or above and has lived in a house for more than two years can force their landlord to sell the freehold for a fair price.
The freehold of a residential block of flats can also be bought if there are enough qualifying leaseholders living there.
If a fair price cannot be agreed, an independent tribunal is set up to decide what the cost should be.
The law has proved unpopular with many major landlords, who have described it as a land grab with the potential to break up estates.
National Trust properties and buildings in a cathedral precinct are exempt, as are many Crown properties including parts of the Duchy of Cornwall.
Edward III, the warrior monarch of the 14th century, set up the Duchy when he decreed that his eldest son, the Black Prince, should enjoy a trust fund worthy of an heir to the throne.
The king parcelled up some of his castles, manors and hamlets, largely in the counties of Cornwall and Devon, and granted them to his son along with the Duke of Cornwall title. His son was free to use the annual profits from his new Duchy as he liked, but at his death must pass on the estate, intact, to his own eldest son.
So it is that Prince Charles can spend the annual profits from this legacy but can never eat into its capital. The Duchy is regulated by the Treasury. Prince Charles became the 24th Duke of Cornwall when his mother became Queen in 1952, when he was aged three-and-a-half.'
Well, Ive looked high and low and cannot find any reference to this supposed decree. All that is said is that the Duchy was formalised in order to bestow Cornwall with its ancient honours and protect it against enemies - and that this would be achieved by direct devolved administration from the Princes, or Duchy, Council - with profits from Cornwalls GDP going to the Duke.
So another media misinformation programme kicks in.
Child abuse cases to be re-opened
Three child abuse cases Cornwall are to be re-examined in the wake of the Baby P case in Haringey.
Farmhouse murder case man freed
A 21-year-old man cleared of murdering a woman in her Cornish farmhouse walks free from court.
Drive clamp-down catches hundreds
More than 1,700 motorists are caught in an undercover police campaign against dangerous driving.
Firm's loss a 'body blow' to town
The closure of a Cornish firm in Bodmin, with the loss of 260 jobs, is a "body blow" says the town's mayor.
Business confidence hits new low
Business confidence in the South West falls to the lowest in England and Wales, according to survey.
Extra planes for stranded Britons
Cornish photgrapher amongst UK tourists stranded in Thailand hoping extra flights will help him return home.
Icy conditions causing accidents
Police warn drivers to beware as icy road conditions cause a number of crashes involving multiple vehicles.
Stranded dolphins returned to sea
Vets, volunteers and marine experts battle for hours to rescue a dolphin and her calf stranded in Cornwall.
.gif){kind=icon}
