Desmo Paul wrote:
Does anyone know about the British Transport Commission Act 1949? I
am told that it prevents anyone obtaining an easement over land owned
by the BTC or their successors. The Land Registry says "Since the
passing of the British Transport Commission Act 1949, it has not
been possible to acquire a right of way by prescription over land
owned by the
commission and forming an access or approach to, among other things,
any
station, depot, dock or harbour belonging to the commission (s.57,
British
Transport Commission Act 1949). The references to the commissionmust
now
be read to include successor rail authorities and the BritishWaterways
Board."

I cannot find any version of the act and am wondering if anyone has
the precise text?

Hmm, I found

Railway and Canal Commission (Abolition) Act 1949 (c.11)

At http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/

Which transferred functions from the aforementioned commission to the
courts.

Can't see a British Transport Commission Act though.

Could it be a case of the wrong title?

I can't find a s57 in that act though, only goes up to s8.

Have you tried the '47 Transport Act?

Following from Clive's post:

In the Crossrail Act 2008, I found reference to:

British Transport Commission Act 1949 (c. xxix)

1949 c. 29 is, according to statuelaw.gov.uk, "The Consular Conventions
Act 1949" ... maybe I don't understand the numbering, or I'm getting the
Roman numerals wrong, but I think xxix = x + x + (x - i) = 10 + 10 + (10
- 1) = 10 + 10 + 9 = 29?

I also found a reference to the BTC Act 1949 in:

The Railways Act 1993 (Consequential Modifications) (No. 2) Order 1999
(No. 1998)

In fact, when I do a full text search, I find 61 results that reference
the British Transport Commission Act 1949, the latest being "The
Penalties for Disorderly Behaviour (Amount of Penalty) (Amendment) Order
2009 (No. 83)" which specifies the amount of a fixed penalty for certain
offences defined in the 1949 act.

I've emailed the contact email address at statutelaw.gov.uk to ask why
the 1949 act isn't on the database.

Rgds

Denis McMahon

On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Denis McMahon wrote:

Following from Clive's post:

In the Crossrail Act 2008, I found reference to:

British Transport Commission Act 1949 (c. xxix)

1949 c. 29 is, according to statuelaw.gov.uk, "The Consular Conventions Act
1949" ... maybe I don't understand the numbering, or I'm getting the Roman
numerals wrong, but I think xxix = x + x + (x - i) = 10 + 10 + (10 - 1) = 10
+ 10 + 9 = 29?

I think there are separate numbering sequences for general public acts and
local acts, with the former having arabic numerals and the latter
lowercase roman. The British Transport Commission Act is a local act, but
you've looked for public acts.

tom

--
There are many ways of going crazy, but the most valuable of them is
this one which makes a genius out of an ordinary man. -- Claudio Grondi

Tom Anderson wrote:

I think there are separate numbering sequences for general public acts
and local acts, with the former having arabic numerals and the latter
lowercase roman. The British Transport Commission Act is a local act,
but you've looked for public acts.

I specified all legislation, and the search won't accept roman numerals.

Rgds

Denis McMahon

On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Denis McMahon wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

I think there are separate numbering sequences for general public acts
and local acts, with the former having arabic numerals and the latter
lowercase roman. The British Transport Commission Act is a local act,
but you've looked for public acts.

I specified all legislation, and the search won't accept roman numerals.

And if the act was in the database, that would have found it, since the
site does correctly find roman-numbered acts from arabic-numbered queries.
I was just trying to explain why there was a number 29 law that wasn't the
one we're looking for.

tom

--
Mathematics is the door and the key to the sciences. -- Roger Bacon

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Denis McMahon wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

I think there are separate numbering sequences for general public
acts and local acts, with the former having arabic numerals and the
latter lowercase roman. The British Transport Commission Act is a
local act, but you've looked for public acts.

I specified all legislation, and the search won't accept roman numerals.

And if the act was in the database, that would have found it, since the
site does correctly find roman-numbered acts from arabic-numbered
queries. I was just trying to explain why there was a number 29 law that
wasn't the one we're looking for.

Indeed, I now have a response from opsi:

"The Act in question is a local Act and therefore is not readily
available in electronic format.

[deleted text]

The OPSI website contains a list of Major Collections of Local
Legislation in the United Kingdom. Please use the following link and
scroll down to about the middle of the page.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/chron-tables/...-to-local-acts

Many of these will also hold general legislation."

The link might be of interest to the OP. It contains a list of places
where he might be able to consult a printed copy.

Rgds

Denis McMahon

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Denis McMahon wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Denis McMahon wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

I think there are separate numbering sequences for general public acts
and local acts, with the former having arabic numerals and the latter
lowercase roman. The British Transport Commission Act is a local act, but
you've looked for public acts.

I specified all legislation, and the search won't accept roman numerals.

And if the act was in the database, that would have found it, since the
site does correctly find roman-numbered acts from arabic-numbered queries.
I was just trying to explain why there was a number 29 law that wasn't the
one we're looking for.

Indeed, I now have a response from opsi:

"The Act in question is a local Act and therefore is not readily available in
electronic format.

[deleted text]

The OPSI website contains a list of Major Collections of Local Legislation in
the United Kingdom. Please use the following link and scroll down to about
the middle of the page.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/chron-tables/...-to-local-acts

Many of these will also hold general legislation."

I got a closely related reply. Here's more of its text:

The Act in question is a local Act and therefore is not readily available
in electronic format. Although the Statute Law Database does hold Local
Acts enacted after 1991, these are not revised. There are a very small
selection of Pre-1991 Local Acts that are revised by the SLD Editorial
team, but the criteria for doing this is lost in the mists of time! They
were inherited from the text of Statutes in Force, but there is nothing
in the guide to the edition which explains why they were included.

The good news is that we are planning to launch a new website later this
year which merges the functionality of OPSI and SLD websites
and it is our intention to include pre-1991 Local Acts, but they will
only be available in their original form i.e. they won't be revised.

So basically, local acts are very much second-class citizens, and will
remain so. When local acts are things like the Ormskirk and Wrabness Ferry
Slipway Act 1972, fair enough. But this act is actually a pretty major
piece of legislation, more important in its concrete impact than most
general public acts, i'd guess (it's the basis for the BTP, for instance),
and it seems a bit of an omission not to have it, or to have any intention
of providing it in amended form. Still, the OPSI/SLD teams have a big job
and a small budget, so they can't do everything that we might like.

tom

--
Swords not words!

On 4 Jan, 22:24, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Denis McMahon wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Denis McMahon wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

I think there are separate numbering sequences for general public acts
and local acts, with the former having arabic numerals and the latter
lowercase roman. The British Transport Commission Act is a local act, but
you've looked for public acts.

I specified all legislation, and the search won't accept roman numerals.

And if the act was in the database, that would have found it, since the
site does correctly find roman-numbered acts from arabic-numbered queries.
I was just trying to explain why there was a number 29 law that wasn't the
one we're looking for.

Indeed, I now have a response from opsi:

"The Act in question is a local Act and therefore is not readily available in
electronic format.

[deleted text]

The OPSI website contains a list of Major Collections of Local Legislation in
the United Kingdom. *Please use the following link and scroll down to about
the middle of the page.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/chron-tables/...-to-local-acts

Many of these will also hold general legislation."

I got a closely related reply. Here's more of its text:

* The Act in question is a local Act and therefore is not readily available
* in electronic format. Although the Statute Law Database does hold Local
* Acts enacted after 1991, these are not revised. There are a very small
* selection of Pre-1991 Local Acts that are revised by the SLD Editorial
* team, but the criteria for doing this is lost in the mists of time! They
* were inherited from the text of Statutes in Force, but there is nothing
* in the guide to the edition which explains why they were included.

* The good news is that we are planning to launch a new website later this
* year which merges the functionality of OPSI and SLD websites
* and it is our intention to include pre-1991 Local Acts, but they will
* only be available in their original form i.e. they won't be revised.

So basically, local acts are very much second-class citizens, and will
remain so. When local acts are things like the Ormskirk and Wrabness Ferry
Slipway Act 1972, fair enough. But this act is actually a pretty major
piece of legislation, more important in its concrete impact than most
general public acts, i'd guess (it's the basis for the BTP, for instance),
and it seems a bit of an omission not to have it, or to have any intention
of providing it in amended form. Still, the OPSI/SLD teams have a big job
and a small budget, so they can't do everything that we might like.

tom

--
Swords not words!

The wonderful TSO have sent me the hard copy. Looks like photocpied
from somewhere. Two staples down the side to hold it together. It is
indeed the item with reference to BTP. If anyone needs an extract I
am sure I can pdf and send if permissable.....