Planning for infrastructure

Infrastructure is a broad term which can encompass a wide range of sectors and types of projects, ranging from schools, hospitals, roads and railway lines to wind, waste and water projects, oil and gas facilities, pipelines and processing plants. Infrastructure projects are often high value and complex and the parties will need to understand, and ensure that the contractual arrangements in place provide for the commercial, strategic, technical, geographical and political factors and the associated risks involved. Due to the broad spectrum of issues involved, infrastructure projects will often involve lawyers from a number of practice areas.

This subtopic looks at planning consent for major infrastructure projects under the regime set out in the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008).

Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs)

PA 2008 process was introduced to streamline the decision-making process for NSIPs for transport, energy, water and waste infrastructure, making it fairer and faster for communities and developers alike. NSIPs include:

  1. electricity generation projects

  2. overhead electric lines

  3. underground gas storage

  4. Liquefied Natural Gas facilities

  5. gas reception facilities

  6. gas transporter pipelines

  7. other pipelines

  8. highways

  9. airports

  10. harbour facilities

  11. railways

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Public Law News

Actions for unlawful police detention and QOCS protection in mixed claims (ALK and another v The Chief Constable of Surrey Police)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: In an appeal heard by Mr Justice Bourne, the High Court held that the arrests of a married couple, both of whom were serving Metropolitan Police officers, by Surrey Police were unlawful. The court found that the arresting officers had not given appropriate consideration to voluntary attendance for interview as a less intrusive alternative under section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984) and Code G. The court stressed that the ‘necessity’ limb in PACE 1984, s 24 is an important constitutional safeguard, following a line of authority that stresses strict adherence to PACE 1984—an officer who gives no real consideration to alternatives runs the ‘plain risk’ of being found to have had no reasonable grounds to believe arrest was necessary. The court therefore allowed the liability appeal. This decision is an important reaffirmation of the strict operational limits on arrest powers. On costs, the court provided useful guidance as to the starting point in mixed personal injury claims, confirming that properly supported PI claims should attract QOCS protection. Bourne J concluded that the claimants’ pleaded and evidenced psychiatric injury claims meant the proceedings could properly be regarded as a personal injury action ‘in the round’ for QOCS purposes, and that the trial judge’s enforcement order permitting 70% of the defendant’s costs should not have been made, under the mixed-claim discretion in CPR 44.16. Written by Connor Wright, barrister, St Philips Chambers.

View Public Law by content type :

Popular documents