The UK government has confirmed it will overhaul rules governing how planning decisions on major infrastructure projects like wind farms can be challenged in the courts.
It will scrap the so-called paper permission stage of initiating legal proceedings, which is the currently the first of three attempts available to opponents seeking to block a scheme.
Primary legislation will also be changed so that where a judge in an oral hearing at the High Court – currently the second attempt – deems the case “totally without merit”, it will not be possible to ask the Court of Appeal to reconsider the verdict.
London said the approach will “strike the right balance” between ensuring access to justice for cases of “genuine issues of propriety” while also “pushing back against a challenge culture where small pressure groups use the courts to obstruct decisions taken in the national interest”.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “For too long, blockers have had the upper hand in legal challenges – using our court processes to frustrate growth.
“We’re putting an end to this challenge culture by taking on the NIMBYs and a broken system that has slowed down our progress as a nation.
“This is the government’s Plan for Change in action – taking the brakes off Britain by reforming the planning system so it is pro-growth and pro-infrastructure.”
According to London, 58% of all decisions on major infrastructure projects are taken to court, with each legal challenge taking on average 18 months to be resolved.
Lord Banner KC, who authored an independent review into legal challenges against Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects, said his review had identified a “clear case for streamlining judicial reviews” because the subsequent delays to projects “cause real detriment to the public interest”.
“I am therefore pleased to see the government acting on the back of my review. In particular, reducing the number of permission attempts to one for truly hopeless cases should weed out the worst offenders, without risking inadvertent delays because judges choose to err on the side of caution.
“I look forward to seeing these changes help to deliver a step change in the pace of infrastructure delivery in the months and years ahead.”