header-logo header-logo

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

Best laid plans

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll