Photography in Kensington Palace Gardens

James Williams made this Freedom of Information request to The Crown Estate

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was successful.

Dear The Crown Estate,

Along Kensington Palace Gardens Road there are signs stating 'no photography'. I would under the freedom of information act like to know under what authority they are placed and under what legistlation they are enforceable.

Yours faithfully,

James Williams

Brazier, Martin, The Crown Estate

2 Attachments

Thank you for your recent information request regarding photography at
Kensington Palace Gardens. I have repeated your request at the bottom of
this email for reference.

 

Kensington Palace Gardens is a private roadway which forms part of The
Crown Estate and public access to the roadway is granted under certain
conditions including the “no photography” rule.  The authority for this
rule is not derived from legislation but from the right of every landowner
to impose conditions on access to its property.

 

Whilst The Crown Estate is the freeholder for all properties on Kensington
Palace Gardens, they are all let on long leases and occupied as either
private individual residences, Ambassadorial residences and a number of
Embassies. The roadway is privately owned by The Crown Estate and as such
access to it is restricted by the security gates at either end.

As I am sure you can appreciate, particularly with the number of
Ambassadorial residences and consular embassies, security is of paramount
concern, and The Crown Estate and our agents work closely with the police
and security services, who have a high visible presence at Kensington
Palace Gardens.

The no photography signage has been in place for a considerable number of
years and is overseen by our managing agents and implemented with the
support of the occupiers and the security services.

If you are not satisfied with my response, you may complain or appeal our
decision, which will be investigated through an Internal Review. If you
are not content with the outcome of the Internal Review, you have the
right to refer your complaint directly to the Information Commissioner for
a decision. Please note that the Information Commissioner cannot make a
decision unless you have first exhausted our own complaints procedure.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Martin Brazier [3]TCE
Freedom of Information Officer Award
Footer
[1]http://logos.thecrownestate.co.uk/the_cr...

The Crown Estate
16 New Burlington Place
London W1S 2HX
Tel: 020 7851 5259
Fax: 020 7851 5125
Mob:
Email: [email address]
[2]www.thecrownestate.co.uk
Please think - do you need to print this email?

 

show quoted sections

Dear Brazier, Martin,

Thank you very much for your response and clarifying for the
general public that these signs are not enforceable by law, as
despite being private land one is still subject to the laws of the
crown and country.

Therefore, any future attempts by any occupiers of the property to
enforce the deletion of photographs taken can be disregarded.

Yours sincerely,

James Williams

Jason Sands left an annotation ()

As private land, the signs are just as enforceable as any other restriction the owner wants to make - if you are doing something the owner objects to you can be ejected as a trespasser.

See the section on private property in this document: http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr

James Williams left an annotation ()

Thanks for your input Jason Sands however the website
Sirimo is not a reputable source and the arguments raised are invalid.

All are equal before the law and Kensington Palace Gardens, despite having a sign saying 'no photography' you are able to take photographs and no intercom system or cctv operator has the power to ask you to delete them. Moreover, the occupants of the properties do not have the power to remove you from the road, only the owners of the road may.

Tom left an annotation ()

James

Clearly you have some anger problems and a chip on your shoulder. It is private property, just as your house is if you own the land. The Crown has kindly allowed people to access the private property for their convenience under the appreciation that they don't take photos. If arrogant children choose to ignore this and claim that the rules which are clearly stated don't matter then they may well remove everyone's rights to use it. What are you trying to achieve my being obnoxious on the internet especially when busy people have the patience to humour you is beyond me.

Tom

(local resident)

James Williams left an annotation ()

Not sure what Planet you are on Tom, but part of the joy of living in the democracy that is the UK is we have lots of civil liberties. This is the right to object to any request by any private security firm. Furthermore the road in particular has residents within it that are not part of the 'crown', therefore voiceless intercoms are irrelevant.

Its interesting that you responded though.
And FOI (as in For your information) [as opposed to freedom of information act] People are kept in jobs and are paid to deliver freedom of information requests. This was an important point.

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org