You might wonder why a Court of Appeal case  about interpretation of a statutory instrument about highways should be setting warning lights flashing for developers. What is interesting about the case of The London Borough of Southwark and the City of London v Transport for London, recently reported, is that, in making the age old distinction between highways and land ownership, it has opened up the possibility of problems for those whose buildings project, or, probably more worryingly, are planned to project over the public highway.

So, a canopy, balcony or bridging building, for example. There are procedures for obtaining projection licences. But in London, and for what are known as "GLA Roads" at least, according to this case, there are now two authorities to deal with - TfL so far as the highway is concerned, and then the London Borough who remains owner of the land, heaven to hell, who will not be constrained by any pubic law restrictions, and who can be as capricious as any other landowner - Stokes v Cambridge, anyone?