Stall dispute is latest chapter in long-running market saga (From Craven Herald)

Holders of a plant stall on Skipton Market are currently in dispute with multi-national company Boots over the use of the setts in front of its High Street premises. Vincent and Kath Wilkinson have been told by Boots they can either pay £20,000 in four years’ back rent or be evicted from the site. The issue will have to be thrashed out in court and the Wilkinsons have been given a preliminary hearing date to appear at Skipton County Court some time between December 12 and January 12. Theirs is not a new fight. Lesley Tate investigates.

12:11pm Thursday 6th October 2011 in Craven History By Lesley Tate, Senior Reporter

Almost exactly 50 years ago, a Skipton stall holder was facing a similar battle. The owners of the shop behind his stall claimed he was trespassing on their land after he had failed to sign a formal agreement with them and stopped paying rent for six months.

The dispute, involving solicitors on both sides, ended in Skipton County Court and after a day-long hearing, the judge’s announcement – that shop owners were indeed entitled to put up stalls or hire out the space – was considered so vital to the town, that it was printed in full, more than 2,000 words of it.

Today, market stall holders the Wilkinsons, including daughter Laura, say they stopped paying the rent to Boots in November, 2007, after the company failed to issue a licence. They had also discovered that not all shops on the High Street charged stall holders to pitch on the setts in front of their premises.

The family, who have run the stall for the past six years, have been supported by more than 1,000 people who have signed their petition calling for Boots to be more understanding.

Meanwhile, Boots has said it is supportive of the local community and had only considered legal action after many years of trying to come to an amicable solution with the Wilkinsons.

Mr Wilkinson has also called for the management of the setts to be taken over by Craven District Council so all market traders are treated in the same way.

Back in December, 1961, Judge Withers Payne found in favour of the then owner of 48-50 High Street, Lennards Ltd, now shoe shop Stead and Simpson.

Lennards was seeking an injunction stopping grocery stall holder James Walker from pitching in front of its premises and trespass damages of £35.

Lennards claimed the shop property extended to the road, including the pavement and the setts, and therefore Mr Walker was trespassing on its land.

But Mr Walker, who employed counsel to defend him, claimed he could not be ejected because Lennards did not own the land.

The hearing at Skipton County Court heard that chief issues were whether Lennards owned freehold rights of the setts, whether market rights held in common permitted stalls to be freely put up on the setts, and crucially, whether owners of High Street premises had prior right to the occupation of the setts.

Mr Walker, or his predecessors, had run a stall on the market in the same spot since 1945, but in 1961 had been issued with a notice to quit. Mr Walker had continued to run his stall and had, therefore, been charged with trespass.

Mr Walker had been paying to the owners of 48-50 High Street a weekly rent to reserve the space in front of their premises, but he had not agreed to a licence and a more formal arrangement and claimed the payments had been made in an act of compromise.

The court heard that Mr Walker’s stall had evolved over the years to become a semi-permanent structure, with electricity and in place every day of the week. In the late 1950s, Lennards Ltd had written to Mr Walker in an attempt to formalise the arrangement. Mr Walker had declined to enter into an agreement, but had started paying 25 shillings per week in rent.

Meanwhile, the then Skipton Urban District Council served notice on both Mr Walker and Lennards to remove the stall because it was considered a permanent structure without planning permission.

Lennards issued Mr Walker with a notice to quit, but he appealed and after he changed his stall from a permanent structure to a mobile one – with wheels – he was allowed to stay. That arrangement satisfied the council, but not Lennards, which launched its legal proceedings.

Two months after the hearing, the judgment of the court was that shop owners, or frontagers, had the right to put up stalls in front of their premises on the setts or let the space to others.

Lennards was awarded £35 damages based on unpaid payments of 25 shillings per week from the issue of its notice to Mr Walker to the date of the hearing.

In his summing up, Judge Withers Payne drew on evidence going back 150 years to show it had long been the practice of frontagers to either put up stalls themselves or rent the space out to others.

Stalls had originally gone up on specific days, for fairs or market days, and had eventually run into other days of the week.

Reference was also made to the earlier case of stall holder Richard Whalley who in 1870 had been indicted for obstructing the Queen’s Highway by putting up a stall in front of his shop in Skipton High Street. Mr Whalley was acquitted by a jury.

The judge granted the Lennards liberty to apply with regard to an injunction if it proved necessary because the shop owners and Mr Walker could not come to an amicable agreement.