Advice to Daniel Murphy

Enquiry

• From: Daniel Murphy
• Date advice given: 19 August 2011
• Enquiry type: Email

Thank you for your response. Could you please clarify the position in respect of the second part of my query, copied below, in particular is it intended that this passage states "reasonably refused that... access" or should it in fact state "unreasonably refused that... access"? The latter would seem to make more sense.

On another point, the IPC's s.53 advice note quotes at page 7 CLG’s Infrastructure Planning (Fees) Regulations 2010 Guidance that; “applicants should only submit requests for... access to parcels of land where they consider they have been reasonably refused that... access.” If this is the case what should an applicant do where it wishes to gain rights of entry and considers that it has been unreasonably refused access to the land?

Advice given

The original guidance quoted in our advice note was drafted by central Government, as you mention. Noting the point you've raised regarding the wording of the guidance, we will take this up with the Department for Communities and Local Government and clarify this in a revised Advice Note.

For immediate clarity, and as per our previous advice, the IPC needs to be satisfied that any request for section 53 authorisation is a 'last resort', and we expect the developer to demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been made to obtain rights of entry to the land prior to making the formal request.

Apologies for the delay, if you have any other queries please do not hesitate to get in touch