Khan loses car-free roads court fight

Mayor took advantage of pandemic to push through ‘irrational and extreme’ ban on traffic, judge rules

THE Mayor of London “took advantage of the pandemic” to “push through” more cycle lanes and road closures to make the capital car-free, the High Court has ruled.

In an embarrassing defeat for Sadiq Khan, two black cab drivers’ organisations have proved the mayor’s schemes to promote walking and cycling were “seriously flawed” and “not a rational response” to issues created by Covid-19.

In her judgment, Mrs Justice Lang ordered Mr Khan and Transport for London to “reconsider” and “substantially amend” its Streetspace policy and a ban on taxis on a bus-only road because “it was both unfair and irrational to introduce such extreme measures”.

The Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association and United Trade Action Group launched the legal action after being banned from a section of the A10 in Bishopsgate, in the City of London, which was still open to buses.

Mrs Justice Lang said that A10 closure to taxis should be quashed, before she rounded on controversial schemes that had led to hundreds of miles of “pop-up cycle lanes” and road closures.

Darren Rogers, of Chiltern Law, who brought the case for the two taxi groups, said he was delighted at winning the “hard-fought” judicial review, which “sets a precedent when local authorities close roads without proper care and analysis”.

The lawyers successfully argued how those drawing up Streetspace failed to distinguish taxis from “general

traffic”, ignoring their “distinct status”, as well as not taking into account the needs of the elderly or disabled – whose rights are protected under the Equality Act – who Mrs Justice Lang found “could not be reasonably expected to cycle, walk or use public transport”. In her criticism, the judge wrote: “If the Mayor and TFL had proceeded more cautiously, monitoring the situation and acting upon evidence rather than conjecture, their proposals would have been proportionate to the difficulties which needed to be addressed.

“As it was, the measures proposed in the plan and the guidance, and implemented in the A10 order, far exceeded what was reasonably required to meet the temporary challenges created by the pandemic.

“It was possible to widen pavements to allow for social distancing, and to allocate more road space to cater for an increase in the number of cyclists, without seeking to ‘transform’ parts of central London into predominantly carfree zones. In my judgment, it was both unfair and irrational to introduce such extreme measures.”

Steve Mcnamara, general secretary of the Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association, said: “We were told the pandemic gave policymakers free rein to act, without consultation, leaving us no choice other than to go to court. The judge has made it clear that this should not have been the case.”

Yesterday’s ruling was welcomed by campaign groups around the country who are also seeking judicial reviews to scrap “low-traffic neighbourhoods” set up by councils as part of Transport Secretary Grant Shapps’s so-called “green revolution” intended to promote social distancing.

Spokesmen for both the mayor and TFL said they were “very disappointed” with the ruling and would launch an appeal.

The mayor’s spokesman added that the wider Streetspace project was “vital” to promote walking and cope with the “huge increase” in cycling, as well as to “reduce the risk of a damaging car-based recovery” and avoid a “public health crisis … caused by congestion and pollution”.

However, a Chiltern Law spokesman said the mayor’s legal team bringing the appeal would have a “difficult task ahead” to prove Mrs Justice Lang “was wrong on so many matters and in so many ways”.

‘In my judgment, it was both unfair and irrational to introduce such extreme measures’