(1)In exercising any function—
(a)a London borough council,
(b)the Common Council, and
(c)any body or person exercising statutory functions in relation to Greater London or any part of Greater London,
is to have regard to the transport strategy.
(2)The Mayor may issue guidance in writing about the implementation of the transport strategy to any council, body or person falling within subsection (1) above.
(3)A council, body or person to whom guidance has been issued under subsection (2) above is to have regard to the guidance in exercising any function.
(4)In exercising any functions in relation to the management of roads or traffic in a Royal Park in Greater London the Secretary of State shall have regard to the transport strategy.
(5)In this section Royal Park means any park to which the Parks Regulation Act 1872 applies (see sections 1 and 3 of the Parks Regulation (Amendment) Act 1926).
Cases considering section 144 3
[2024] EWHC 3262 (Admin) · 17 December 2024
The judgment confirms a statutory duty to have regard to the Mayor of London’s transport strategy when exercising functions. The officers’ report sufficiently communicated the relationship between the scheme and the strategy’s objectives. (see paras [3]; [67])
The judgment confirms the duty to have regard to statutory guidance issued by the Mayor of London about implementing the transport strategy. No breach was established. (see paras [3]; [67])
[2018] EWHC 2402 (Admin) · 13 September 2018Limits
The provision requires London boroughs to have regard to the transport strategy and permits guidance to be issued. It did not establish that Westminster was obliged to approve the works at issue (see paras [45], [65]).
[2026] EWCA Civ 24 · 22 January 2026
The Court treats the duty to have regard to the Mayor of London’s transport strategy and statutory guidance as applicable, but finds that the Officers’ Report did have regard to the relevant transport objectives. (see paras [38], [42], [56])
The Court treats the statutory-guidance limb of the duty as part of the relevant-consideration framework, but concludes that the decision-making materials adequately addressed the relevant transport objectives. (see paras [38], [56])
What each judgment says about section 144 is in the case-law panel in the full Act.