Shooting Rights

Archer

Well-Known Member
I've been offered some "pay to use" woodland (at 50% of the cost of the annual lease) by a mate who has just taken it on.

The contract between the holder of the lease and the land owner just says
"The owner has granted exclusive shooting rights to the licensee"
So,
If we set up this arrangement is the licensee in breach of contract?

2 reasons for asking
1, If I present this as evidence to any police officer who investigates me being on the land, is it going to be accepted as proof of permission? - My name and signature aren't on it

2 The contract clearly states any breach of the terms will cause termination without compensation of the contract so he/we could forfeit the woodland

Would a contract between mate and l circumvent the potential problem?
I'm going to run this past my FEO in the morning but meantime I was wondering what others think.
 
Check out the word exclusive, I would reckon it means to him only, sublets would not be covered, you would be wise to enquire with the landowner through your mate.
 
Legal dictionary definition:

EXCLUSIVE, rights. Debarring one from participating in a thing. An exclusive right or privilege, is one granted to a person to do a thing, and forbidding all others to do the same. A patent right or copyright, are of this kind.
 
The exclusivity of the agreement protects your mate from the land owner leasing it to others at the same time.

What you need to see is that your mate has the right to sub lease. Or if your planning on sharing it then why not put your name on he main lease?
 
Exclusivity to exclude the landowner leasing to others makes sense but exclusivity can cut both ways

"An exclusive right or privilege, is one granted to a person to do a thing, and forbidding all others to do the same" warns of the law of unforeseen consequences biting you on the bum

1/ The right sub letting is main concern for me at the moment
2/ He wants the lease in his name only so that's a dead end
 
The exclusivity of the agreement protects your mate from the land owner leasing it to others at the same time.

What you need to see is that your mate has the right to sub lease. Or if your planning on sharing it then why not put your name on he main lease?

Exclusivity to exclude the landowner leasing to others makes sense but exclusivity can cut both ways

"An exclusive right or privilege, is one granted to a person to do a thing, and forbidding all others to do the same" warns of the law of unforeseen consequences biting you on the bum

1/ The right to sub let is main concern for me at the moment
2/ He wants the lease in his name only so that's a dead end
 
Last edited:
Pay monthly to your mate, and as long as you have a written permission from him as the occupier of the sporting lease there shouldn't be a problem. Very few private leases forbid leaseholder from having their guests there.
 
Pay monthly to your mate, and as long as you have a written permission from him as the occupier of the sporting lease there shouldn't be a problem. Very few private leases forbid leaseholder from having their guests there.

Wrong Sir !
Exclusive rights to the licensee are just that and permitting another individual to participate will be ARMED TRESPASS.

HWH.
 
I would be wary of using the dictionary definition of a word such as "Exclusive" to mean the same as a legal definition. I think a legal opinion is required here, so best to talk to your legal rep. if you are in a shooting org.

It may be that if there is no clause fordidding sub-letting then it is ok. I really don't know, but I do know that legal rulings can change definitions like these overnight, so a legal opinion is wise.
 
I can't see how your friend has the authority to grant you permission to shoot as he only holds a licence to shoot over the land himself and does not possess the shooting rights.
The only way to properly find out is to contact a lawyer or your shooting organisation for an opinion, and they will almost certainly say that they will need to see any written contracts in order to give an opinion. You also need to ask if the leaseholder actually has the authority to grant permission to your friend also.
 
Last edited:
I think that most people reading the phrase "exclusive rights" would take it to mean exclusive to that person who has rented those rights. To assume otherwise and just hope that he can give others permission to shoot there is courting danger. The best advice would be to seek positive clarification from the person who actually owns the shooting rights.

Run it past the FEO if you want, but don't fall into the trap of thinking that your FEO is some sort of judge of what's right and what's wrong in the shooting world. He's employed to do enquiries on firearms applications and renewals, check your security and so on.
 
Most posters are putting into words what I feel - the landowner can give permission but the leaseholder- under the wording on the current papers- not.

My FEO is a good bloke and l know his remit.
He will explain how he would view things,if I were to put this forward as a permission when applying for an FAC (which l'm not), but l will value his comments and, like those posted on here, they will help me with where l take this.
 
Landlord and tenant law is a minefield. You can accidentally create all sorts of legal rights. You seem to term this a lease, however the payee is termed a licensee according to your post - a license is non exclusive use and a lease is exclusive, and it doesn't matter what terms are used, it is the facts of the case.
Ask a good rural practice chartered surveyor if you don't want to bother the freeholder, they will have come across this scenario in one guise or another many times.
 
Landlord and tenant law is a minefield. You can accidentally create all sorts of legal rights. You seem to term this a lease, however the payee is termed a licensee according to your post - a license is non exclusive use and a lease is exclusive, and it doesn't matter what terms are used, it is the facts of the case.
Ask a good rural practice chartered surveyor if you don't want to bother the freeholder, they will have come across this scenario in one guise or another many times.

Interesting comment on the words lease and licensee.
I've quoted them as used in the document so I'm now wondering who wrote this document and who created the phrases/clauses:)
 
Wrong Sir !
Exclusive rights to the licensee are just that and permitting another individual to participate will be ARMED TRESPASS.

HWH.

You may think it, however it is exactly the arrangement I have on my ground with exclusive rights to me. I also have authority to let others stalk and take deer with my permission.. They would not be committing armed trespass on my ground.
 
I've been offered some "pay to use" woodland (at 50% of the cost of the annual lease) by a mate who has just taken it on.

The contract between the holder of the lease and the land owner just says
"The owner has granted exclusive shooting rights to the licensee"
So,
If we set up this arrangement is the licensee in breach of contract?

2 reasons for asking
1, If I present this as evidence to any police officer who investigates me being on the land, is it going to be accepted as proof of permission? - My name and signature aren't on it

2 The contract clearly states any breach of the terms will cause termination without compensation of the contract so he/we could forfeit the woodland

Would a contract between mate and l circumvent the potential problem?
I'm going to run this past my FEO in the morning but meantime I was wondering what others think.


Ask yourself this if you bought exclusive rights then the owner let someone else on the land would you mind?
personally I think your mate is at it here, your going to subsidise his lease, if your paying half the lease should have both names on it. Anything less and I would walk away....police don't listen to-: but he said I could, I thought it was fine.
 
How do sporting agents who obtain exclusive rights manage to sell them on then?

Ian.

By it being clearly stated in the original lease!!! I don't think the issue here is about other people sub letting. it is about the wording of this lease. if it turns out that the lease can be changed/worded differently so as to allow 'sub letting/another rifle' to use the i don't think there would be a issue.

David
 
Surely the landowner has to be told about this arrangement. Otherwise how does he know if you are legally shooting on his land or just another poacher?
 
Back
Top