Skip to main content

T: 020 7353 8415

  • Glass building

Congestion Charging Equipment is Not Development

James Pereira QC

In January 2007, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea served two trial enforcement notices on Transport for London in respect of CCTV cameras, poles and cabinets erected by Transport for London on roads for which RBKC are the highway authority.

By decision letter of 4 December 2007 TfL's appeals have now been allowed and the enforcement notices quashed.

The Inspector found that the equipment was a highway improvement falling within section 95A of the highways Act 1980 as amended ( "equipment for the detection of traffic offences"). He rejected RBKC's three arguments (i) that section 95A did not apply to a civil (as opposed to criminal) contravention; or (ii) that it did not apply because the equipment had been erected on roads for which RBKC ( and not TfL) was the highway authority; and (iii) that the equipment had been erected by TfL as a charging ( as opposed to highway) authority. Therefore he found that the equipment was an improvement of a road by a highway authority and excluded from being development by section 55(2)(b) of the Town and Country Planning Ac 1990. He found it unnecessary to deal with the merits of the ground (a) appeals.

Charles George QC and James Pereira appeared for TfL at the Public Inquiry.