From energy networks to transport corridors, the scale and urgency of development required to meet economic and environmental targets demands a step change in delivery. Yet amid this acceleration, one critical question remains largely unaddressed: is the current approach to engaging with landowners still fit for purpose?

The traditional balance of power

Historically, the balance of power is weighted towards developers and acquiring authorities. Under Section 172 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 they can enter third party land to carry out surveys with just 14 days’ written notice. Occupation is not time-limited, and landowners are afforded minimal rights to challenge – typically only through the costly and complex route of judicial review. There is also no requirement for independent oversight. In practice, this leaves landowners with limited recourse.

While the land component of a nationally significant infrastructure project (NSIP) may represent a relatively small proportion of the overall scheme cost, its value to a scheme is significant – without access to land a project’s viability is at risk. And of course, the physical impact and financial cost for individual landowners is often substantial. The disruption caused by surveys, the uncertainty surrounding land acquisition, and the potential long-term implications for the land, its use, and value highlight the current disconnect between the importance of developing new infrastructure and the experience of those directly affected by the scheme.

Compounding this issue is the lack of consistency across consenting regimes in England and Wales. The requirements and processes that govern access and acquisition can vary significantly depending on whether a project is residential, commercial, or part of a utility scheme.

Judicial review

The recent case in Wales of Barstow and others v Green Generation Energy Networks Cymru Limited [2026] EWHC 1698 (Admin) sought to clarify the standards expected of developers and acquiring authorities seeking access to private land for surveys under Section 172 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016.

The judgment handed down on 7 July strengthens the practical steps developers must take before entering land. Notices must be served on every owner and occupier and cannot simply “run with the land”. Recipients of the notice must be given enough information to understand what activity will occur, where, and with an indication of the timeframe. Developers should also make reasonable attempts to contact landowners or occupiers before entry, and the notice period prior to entry must be proportionate to the nature and intrusiveness of the proposed survey works.

Importantly, compliance is not merely procedural. Notices should reflect the Code of Practice on Powers of Entry, including sufficient detail about survey activity, location and operational arrangements. Developers should also seek relevant land-specific information, such as livestock, disease restrictions, biosecurity concerns and access constraints.

The decision is particularly relevant as, from 24 July 2026, revised section 53 Planning Act 2008 powers will allow Development Consent Order promoters broader access for surveys. The new notice regime expressly requires plans, entry points and evidence of contact attempts, increasing the upfront administration but also reinforcing the direction of travel: developers must engage earlier, tailor notices and show the decision-making process is made on a case-by-case or site-by-site basis.

A case for change: introducing a Landowner Charter

Against this backdrop of an accelerated pace of change there is a compelling case for a new, more structured approach – one that places engagement, transparency, and fairness at its core – such as a Landowner Charter.

Rather than relying solely on statutory powers at the point of need, a charter would encourage developers to engage with landowners well in advance of serving notice for access, in much the same way that acquiring authorities are encouraged to do when utilising Compulsory Purchase Order powers. This early dialogue would not only foster trust but also allow for the identification and mitigation of potential issues before they become barriers to progress.

At its heart, the charter would establish a clear framework for communication moving engagement away from a transactional process towards one of collaboration.

Transparency, certainty, and efficiency

Beyond communication, a Landowner Charter could also introduce greater transparency in how terms for land acquisition and access rights are agreed. Setting out clear principles for negotiation, alongside indicative timescales, would provide both developers and landowners with a shared understanding of the process.

This clarity is not simply a matter of fairness – it is a matter of efficiency. Projects that are underpinned by strong stakeholder relationships are less likely to encounter delays caused by disputes, objections, or access challenges. In contrast, reliance on statutory powers as a first resort can create friction, increase the risk of legal challenge, and ultimately slow down delivery.

Adopting a Landowner Charter would represent more than a procedural adjustment – it would signal a cultural shift in how the real estate and infrastructure sectors approach land. It acknowledges that while statutory powers are necessary, they should not be the default mechanism for engagement. Instead, they should sit alongside a framework that prioritises dialogue, fairness, and mutual understanding.

In a system long defined by process and precedent, this new approach recognises that how we deliver infrastructure is just as important as what we deliver.

Further information

Contact Kirk Macdiarmid; James Perna or Jessica Arrowsmith

 Visit the Savills Infrastructure page for more details