Low Traffic Neighbourhood campaigners save schemes

Court of Appeal rules Mayor of Tower Hamlets failed to follow Local Implementation Plan when planning to scrap LTNs

Tower Hamlets’s plans to remove three Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) in Bethnal Green, Shoreditch and Columbia Road without obtaining the approval of the Mayor of London was unlawful, the Court of Appeal has found.

The court found that Tower Hamlets’ Mayor Lutfur Rahman had breached his duty to consider the council’s Local Implementation Plan (LIP) and that his actions did not align with Londonwide transport strategies.

The Court of Appeal’s decision overturns a High Court judicial review ruling in November 2024 which rejected all seven grounds brought by campaigners, who then launched an appeal.

The LTN schemes, which use cameras and bollards to restrict through-traffic, were implemented in 2020 under former mayor John Briggs. Mayor Rahman, who won the election in 2022 on a platform to “reopen our roads”, argued that the schemes increased congestion on surrounding main roads, disadvantaged working class residents and blocked emergency services. He decided to remove the routes in September 2023.

However, road safety groups, including Save Our Safer Streets (SOSS), argued removing the restrictions would violate air quality and safety obligations and would be expensive, unpopular, and harmful for residents’ health and safety.

Lord Justice Singh, Lord Justice Arnold and Lord Justice Miles all agreed that the London borough has breached a duty in relation to the implementation of a Local Implementation Plan which must be prepared by a London borough containing its proposals for the implementation of the Mayor of London’s transport strategy in its area. Lord Justice Singh said he was “particularly impressed” by the submissions from Transport for London (TfL), which appeared as an interested party in the proceedings. TfL argued that the High Court judge’s error in the original case was to ask himself the wrong question.

In his summary, Singh said: “His [the judge’s] analysis focussed on whether, if the Respondent had failed to implement the Scheme in accordance with the LIP either in time or at all, the Mayor of London could enforce its duty to implement the Scheme in accordance with the LIP pursuant to section 151 by obtaining a mandatory order by way of judicial review (as opposed to, for example, exercising his powers under section 152).”

The judge said that the “correct question” was whether Tower Hamlets was under a duty to retain the scheme by virtue of section 151, with the consequence that its decision to remove the scheme without obtaining the Mayor of London’s approval of a revised LIP was unlawful. “In other words that, as well as the positive duties in section 151, there is a negative duty not to act inconsistently with an LIP which has been approved by the Mayor of London,” the judge said.

“The answer to that question turns on whether ‘implement’ in section 151 means ‘implement (but without any obligation to retain)’ or ‘implement (and retain)’. In my judgement, it is, obvious that the concept of ‘implement’ in its statutory context includes an obligation to retain an approved scheme. Accordingly, the Respondent’s decision to remove the Scheme without going through the statutory process for revising it, including the approval of the Mayor of London, was unlawful,” he said. The appropriate remedy would be a quashing order. Judges Arnold and Miles both agreed.

Transport for London welcomed the court’s decision. A TfL spokesperson said: “We are very pleased with the court’s decision in this case, which provides welcome clarity on the scope of London boroughs’ legal duties to implement and retain schemes funded by TfL to implement the Mayor of London’s transport strategy. Walking and cycling infrastructure, such as low traffic neighbourhoods, plays an important role in making our streets safer.”

Despite the Court of Appeals ruling,Tower Hamlets Council has indicated it will appeal to the Supreme Court. A spokesperson said: “We are disappointed with the ruling, not least because previously the courts have ruled in our favour. We will review the judgment which has significant implications across London, and we will be seeking permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.”

While attempting to remove the main LTNs, Tower Hamlets Council has continued to maintain 33 timed School Streets closures and the Wapping bus gate.

Save Our Safer Streets welcomes judges’ decision

Ted Maxwell of Save Our Safer Streets said: “This is a victory for local people who came together when they saw that their community stood to lose the safer streets they really value. This means the Mayor of Tower Hamlets must now accept that our safer streets are here to stay and he should look for a better use of £2.5m of public funds. Things have changed a lot in the three and a half years since the mayor first wanted to rip out the LTNs. More and more people across Tower Hamlets appreciate the benefits brought by the calmer streets and at a time when so many of our fellow residents are struggling with the cost of living, there are so many better ways to spend public funds than on destroying community space and making our streets more dangerous and putting people’s health at risk.

“As things stand, Tower Hamlets is falling further and further behind other London boroughs when it comes to having healthy neighbourhoods and healthy streets. We have the second highest rates of childhood obesity in London, one of the highest rates of hit and runs in London, and 71% of our children live in poverty.

“Whenever they are asked, people say they want more help to walk, wheel or cycle around the borough. A 2023 survey by Sustrans showed that half of Tower Hamlets residents want to walk or wheel more, and almost as many want to cycle more. Half wanted more government funding for cycling and almost 60% wanted money spent on better walking and wheeling routes. 

“We would like to see the council listen to the views of residents, schools, GPs, the Met Police and TfL and work with them to make transport policy decisions that people actually want.”

Ricardo Gama, partner at campaign’s law firm Leigh Day, added: “Our client is delighted that, after a legal battle that has gone on for more than two years, the Court of Appeal has agreed that it would be unlawful for Tower Hamlets Council to rip up the safer streets schemes. In a context where the Mayor of London’s transport strategy promotes low traffic infrastructure, and Tower Hamlets had agreed a plan to implement the Bethnal Green low traffic schemes, this judgment confirms that the Tower Hamlets’ Mayor cannot unilaterally go against that strategy.”