The Court of Appeal has rejected a legal challenge to the “low-traffic neighbourhood” (LTN) scheme set up by the London Borough of Lambeth.
LTNs are roads and streets where the movement of cars is restricted to promote walking and cycling and discourage motorists. Councils across the country have been setting up LTNs during the pandemic. When set up, via “experimental traffic orders” (ETOs), residents have six weeks to bring a legal challenge if they want to oppose the decision.
While LTNs are very popular with some residents, they are deeply disliked by others – and more than a dozen court challenges are currently going through the court system.
The current case has been brought by Lambeth resident Sofia Sheakh who, owing to a lung condition, has restricted mobility and is heavily reliant upon car transport.
Sheakh lives in the Herne Hill area of the borough. She has chronic sarcoidosis and became more vulnerable after contracting Covid-19 in 2020.
This means she is unable to use public transport and relies on her car for all journeys.
“She and others who rely on using a car say that their lives have been made more difficult by the introduction of the low-traffic neighbourhoods – because the traffic displaced has increased congestion on local streets and added to the time spent on journeys,” three judges said in a ruling this week.
“They say that the council overlooked these consequences when making the experimental traffic orders, and that it failed to comply with the public sector equality duty.”
The case was dismissed by the High Court in June last year. However, Sheakh was given permission to appeal over the issues of public sector equality duty.
The case was heard in January and the judges examined the council’s decision-making process. In a ruling handed down earlier this week, the judges found that the council did not make any errors relating to its equality duty.
“The council lawfully discharged the section 149 duty when it made the experimental traffic orders for the three low-traffic neighbourhoods challenged in these proceedings,” the ruling said. “The appeal must be dismissed.”
R (on the application of Sheakh) v London Borough of Lambeth Council
and between:
Sofia Sheakh v London Borough of Lambeth Council
Court of Appeal (Lindblom LJ, Males LJ, Laing LJ) 5 April 2022 [2022] EWCA Civ 457
