Transport Secretary Justine Greening has published a
consultation on proposed reform of the process for stopping up and
diverting local roads. The aim is to speed up and streamline
the decision making process and to reduce delays suffered by new
developments as a result of separate planning and highways
processes. The consultation follows the Penfold Review of
non-planning consents, and the Government's "red tape
The proposals would allow stopping up and diversion orders to be
made in parallel with planning applications. At present,
developers must wait until planning permission has been granted (or
an application has been called-in or an appeal lodged) before
making an application under sections 247, 248 or 253 of
the Highways Act 1980.
The government is also seeking views on whether local planning
or highway authorities should be empowered to determine
applications for stopping up and diversion orders. At
present, outside Greater London, applications are determined by the
Secretary of State. The proposal to devolve powers to local
authorities reflects the localism agenda – giving local
authorities decision making power over issues which affect their
The consultation is open until 24 August 2012, and seeks further
ideas or comments on how the application process for stopping up
and diversion orders can be streamlined and improved. The
consultation document can be found here:
This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron
McKenna's free online information service. To register for
Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq
Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance
only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now
articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to
give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates
to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication
and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent
The original publication date for this article was
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Charterers faced cargo claims arising from the contamination of containerised cargo with fuel oil. Charterers settled these claims and claimed an indemnity from Owners under the time charter between them.
In Dry Bulk Handy Holding Inc v Fayette International Holdings Ltd, the court considered whether a shipowner is entitled to demand payment to himself of freight under his bill of lading when that contract stipulates for payment to another party, provided the shipowner makes his demand before the freight has been paid to that other party.
A discussion on a recent judgment in relation to a case which considered whether a charterers' failure to pay hire is a breach of a condition which entitles owners to cancel the charter, and claim damages for the unperformed part.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”