This is only partially correct. They have a legal property right to their airspace up to a reasonable height; that is not the same as controlling the airspace for the purposes of aircraft, but they could argue in court that your flying camera was therefore “on their property”, and a court would have to decide how to interpret the bye-laws. There has been case law about aerial photography, but I seem to recall that was in relation to trespass rather than contravention of a specific bye-law.
None of this will be clear-cut unless new case law sorts it out. And I’m not volunteering 
1 Like
Is there paranormal activity on the seafront? I ask as I’m a Hayling Island resident.
The only restriction I can find on flying is that the nature reserve is classed as a sensitive area and, when I have asked one of the volunteers she thought it due to potential disturbance to nesting birds even though military helicopters often fly over lower than 400 feet.
I’ve flown from the beach at the Eastoke Point end and also further along at the Sinah Common gun site and everyone who has stopped to watch and ask questions has been pleasant. The main seafront - Eastoke corner to the funfair- is well-populated with dog walkers and the council have decided to kill any tourist trade by making the car parking fee £6 all year round - and most of the nearby roads are double-yellows.
Let me know when you are coming over 
Just read this. how relevant it is now???
The (UK-wide) Civil Aviation Act 1982 denies the landowner any remedy for “trespass” or “nuisance” “by reason only of the flight of an aircraft over any property at a height above the ground which, having regard to wind, weather and all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, or the ordinary incidents of such flight.”. The specific legal restrictions on small unmanned aircraft (such as toy helicopters) include: no flights unless the person in charge reasonably thinks it is safe to do so and maintains “unaided visual contact” sufficient to navigate safely. If surveillance kit (a camera) is aboard, more restrictions apply, including the need to stay at least 30 metres away from “any person”, except the craft’s controller, during takeoff and landing (Air Navigation Order 2009). Flying over or near residential premises with an onboard camera may amount to “intrusive surveillance” requiring authorisation under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Scotland) Act 2000, an authorisation that can be given only for police surveillance for criminal investigation purposes. Any use of a surveillance camera is also likely to come under the Data Protection Act as there is likely to be other information with which the images can be combined as “personal data”. Passing satellites, whether from the UK or another party to the UN Outer Space Treaty, are dealt with by the Outer Space Act 1986.
1 Like
That just illustrates how complex all the legal stuff actually is, and why we’re generally best being considerate and pragmatic rather than getting too caught up in the legalities.
For NT, there are specific criminal offenses under their bye-laws which relate to nuisance, commercial photography etc. The exemption in the Civil Aviation Act relates to civil (not criminal) trespass and nuisance (and civil nuisance is not the same as what an ordinary person means by “nuisance”). I think it would need a court or lawyer to confirm whether that Act provides a defence against parts of the NT bye-laws.
Back a few months now in the tread about flying over nt and eh land, someone ( can’t remember who now) enquired with the caa about this very issue, caa confirmed eh and nt can control what happens on there land but not what happens above it, that falls under the jurisdiction of the caa and so long as the drone code is being followed you can fly over.
That was their official response on the subject, I wish I’d bookmarked it now!
The question arose over Stonehenge flights.
1 Like
Hi, yes a great move by the council allong with banning campers over night !
I see on some sites that the hayling flying club says they have the rights ?
Not sure about paranormal lol but plenty of places do !
You can’t treat the CAA advice as a fully informed legal opinion in this instance, it is not their function to adjudicate on the NT bye-laws.
I’ve never heard of the Hayling flying club. Nor have I heard of anyone having exclusive rights to a public place. Sounds dubious to me
2 Likes
@dazer2000 That’s the point tho. NT bylaws have no basis in airspace. It’s like you trying to stop someone parking outside your house on the street.
Ian
3 Likes
Appaerntly bylaws again ?
I don’t think there is any basis for that statement The laws on the ground don’t suddenly cease applying each time you jump off it, and if you rob somebody in an aeroplane while flying over England, you can be tried in an English court. Any landowner owns property rights in the lower airspace above their land, and it will be for a court to determine to what extent the NT bye-laws apply within that airspace.
Of course there’s basis for that statement; the CAA govern airspace rules, not the landowner under English law, although granted it’s different in Scotland. The grey area is nusiance, but the CAA have outlined that a 50m bubble mitigates the possibility of causing nusiance.
If it were to come to court, the NT byelaws would almost certainly fall flat given their stated reasons are so clearly wrong, like their very first reason stating CAA regs do not permit flying over or near to people, which is not true. But I’m not here to argue; if this is your view, feel free to avoid flying over NT land.
3 Likes
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. The CAA govern rules for flying safely in airspace. They do not have anything to do with airspace property rights, nor do they over-ride civil law regarding nuisance, privacy or anything else. Bye-laws cannot simply be dismissed because the CAA take a different view - they remain the law and a court can enforce them.
To be specific: nobody should assume that they are immune from a nuisance law-suit simply because they are outside a 50m bubble. The Air Navigation Order does not over-ride those other legal principles in any way.
I don’t let any of this affect me - I have recently flown both from and over NT land without their permission and I’ve shared the photos on this forum. But I think anyone ending up in court over these issues relying on the defence of “the CAA said I could” will be in for a big shock, and it would be misleading to pretend otherwise.
It is a very grey area so it seems, I whilst behaving in everday life tend to have the opinion that providing I am not harming anyone intentionally or unknowingly or causing a nuisence of myself then I am not doing anything wrong, I see each and every day some silly law or act being bought out to govern us in some kind of way.
People often get the wrong idea as well, like a man with a camera and tripod needs a licence to take a picture in public etc which we all know is not the case but many people who are un educated to this seem to think they are right.
If someone comes up to me shouting and swearing about my motorbike in a car parking space…the weekend before ! the first thing they assume is that I dont pay road tax and cant drive a car ! wrong !!! been driving 28 years and its a 1400cc, costs £126 a year to tax and insurance is about £180…strange when the car they are driving is £30 a year and they just blew their horn at me on a sunday and swore at me with their kids in the car !!! the rightous right.
1 Like
Hi. Ok so here it is. I am totally aware of the rules and regulations about where I can fly and distances etc, but what is really stumping me is areas I can fly from. For example, tomorrow I was hoping to fly around Mam tor near Castleton, and also Winnats pass, but I have just checked the map on dronescene.co.uk and it is on National trust land, which I have read is a no no. However the location on the map has a recomendation to fly there.
Basically can I fly in these locations? Thanks for any advice.
1 Like
Just go try
Looking forward to you posting the images 
3 Likes
The legal answer: it’s a criminal offense under NT bye-laws to disturb, interrupt or annoy anyone using NT property; other than that there is no law whatsoever to prevent you taking off elsewhere and flying over their land; if you take off from their land they could (at most) declare you a trespasser and ask you to leave. So: get out there, get on with it, and do what you can to avoid disturbing anybody.
If it helps give reassurance, these photos and this pano were taken while flying above NT land (and indeed, standing on it, although I only found that out afterwards).
3 Likes
