Diversion Orders

From GPG

Public path diversion order : diversion of an existing footpath or bridleway

Before making a diversion order the authority must be satisfied that it is expedient to divert the path in the interests either of the public or of the owner, lessee or occupier of the land crossed by the path. The authority must also be satisfied that the diversion order does not alter any point of termination of the path, other than to another point on the same path, or another highway connected with it, and which is substantially as convenient to the public. Nor can the termination be altered where this is not on a highway (i.e. a cul-de-sac).

Before confirming a diversion order the authority or the Secretary of State must be satisfied that:

• the diversion is expedient in the interests of the person(s) stated in the order;
• the path will not be substantially less convenient to the public as a consequence of the diversion;
• it is expedient to confirm the order having regard to the effect it will have on public enjoyment of the path as a whole, on other land served by the existing path and on land affected by any proposed new path, taking into account the provisions for compensation.

In practice the Secretary of State disregards any temporary circumstances (such as obstructions) preventing or diminishing the use of the path by the public when considering an opposed diversion order.

See a procedure for diversion order and diversion order application pack.

See Pendle Borough Council diversion order application forms and Pendle notes to applicants.

Concurrent orders

An authority may sometimes make two or more orders that it wishes to be considered concurrently. For example, a creation order may be made in association with an extinguishment order. It is still necessary, however, to ensure that each order meets the appropriate tests and criteria laid down in the legislation. So in the example above, the creation order has to be considered on its own merits. If it is decided to confirm the creation order the extent to which the newly-created path would provide an alternative path to that proposed for closure can then be taken into account in considering the extinguishment order (assuming the extinguishment is conditional on the creation).