header-logo header-logo

Best laid plans

24 June 2016 / Martin Burns
Issue: 7704 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR
printer mail-detail
nlj_7704_burns

ADR can be an effective mechanism to help speed up the planning process when used wisely, says Martin Burns

For decades there have been frequent discussions and proposals about using alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to inspire harmony between participants in the planning process, and speed up official decisions about planning matters.

At the Royal Town Planning Institute Conference in 1996, former chief planning inspector, Chris Shepley, encouraged the use of mediation in planning.

The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 promised a new approach to the delivery of the English planning system and, among other things, promoted consensus over confrontation.

In 2006 Kate Barker recommended that the department of communities and local government (DCLG) should establish a planning mediation service to act as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism within the planning system.

The Killian/Pretty Review of 2008 recommended use of ADR at all stages of the planning application process.

Requirement for compulsion

It would appear, however, that the material results of all the talk and encouragement for ADR have been little more than

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll