Can a road that was once legally schemed under the planning regime lose its status simply because it no longer appears in blue on a Local Plan map? That was the central question addressed by the Court of Appeal (Inferior Jurisdiction), presided over by Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti, in Scicluna Enterprises (Gozo) Ltd vs Planning Authority decided on 30 April 2025.

The case arose in relation to Triq ta’ Lonzi in Kerċem, Gozo—an alleyway clearly identifiable on the 1968 survey sheets and included within the 1988 Temporary Provisions Schemes (TPS), but no longer bearing a blue alignment line on the Local Plan’s Policy Map 14.5-A. The appellant argued that in the absence of such a blue line, Triq ta’ Lonzi could not be considered a schemed road, and therefore the proposed development with a façade onto it violated Policy P33 of the DC15 guidance, which regulates internal development.

But the Court refused to reduce the law to cartography. It emphasised that planning interpretation must proceed holistically, drawing from historical survey data, TPS documentation, previous permits, and the Local Plan in its entirety. It observed that Triq ta’ Lonzi had consistently featured in planning documentation and had served as frontage in earlier developments—confirming its functional and legal status as a schemed road.

“Il-Qorti tqis li dan ma hux punt ta’ ligi izda interpretazzjoni tal-mapep tal-pjan lokali mnejn jirrizulta li Triq ta’ Lonzi kienet ezistenti mis-survey sheets tal-1968 u fil-mappa 14.5-C tal-pjan lokali li turi li s-sit hu wiehed zviluppabbli b’indikazzjoni li jhares fuq zewg faccati.”
[The Court considers this not a point of law but one of interpretation: Triq ta’ Lonzi existed on the 1968 survey sheets and Map 14.5-C shows the site as developable with frontage on two streets.]

The Court further noted that Local Plan maps are not to be relied on for direct measurement or definitive interpretation. Their authority is conditioned by the very planning document they form part of:

“Il-mapep kollha… ma ghandhomx jittiehdu ghal interpretazzjoni diretta taghhom.”
[All maps… are not to be used for direct interpretation.]

Most importantly, the Court highlighted the presumption of continuity in planning law. Since there had been no formal amendment removing Triq ta’ Lonzi from the schemed road network, its legal status remained intact. The absence of a blue line did not amount to repeal.

“Triq ta’ Lonzi… gie rikonoxxuta bhala triq pubblika kemm fit-TPS, kif ukoll fil-Plan Lokali… in-nuqqas ta’ linja blu… ma’ jbiddel xejn.”
[Triq ta’ Lonzi was recognised as a public road under both the TPS and the Local Plan… the absence of a blue alignment changes nothing.]

In reaffirming that a road’s schemed status cannot be undone by omission or stylistic change in cartography, the Court has restored legal coherence to a domain often muddied by superficial readings of planning instruments. The blue line may be absent, but its absence does not efface legal status—particularly when other instruments and practices affirm it.

This judgment stands as a clear reminder: the planning system is not a colouring exercise. A schemed road, once established, retains its force unless formally amended. In planning law, continuity speaks louder than colour.