According to legislation.gov.uk, the A46 Coventry Junctions (Walsgrave) Development Consent (Correction) Order 2026 was made on 22 May 2026 and came into force on 27 May 2026. The instrument corrects errors and omissions in the earlier A46 Coventry Junctions (Walsgrave) Development Consent Order 2026, cited as S.I. 2026/537. The practical point is straightforward. This is not a fresh grant of development consent for the scheme. It is a legal correction to the text of the existing order made under the Planning Act 2008.
The published instrument places the amendment within Schedule 4 to the Planning Act 2008. That schedule allows the Secretary of State to correct a development consent order where the defect is a correctable error, rather than requiring a new consent process. Legislation.gov.uk records that the Secretary of State received a written request from the applicant before the end of the relevant statutory period. That timing matters because the correction route is only available within the period set by paragraph 1(6)(a) of Schedule 4.
The order also records that the relevant local planning authorities were informed that a correction request had been received. That step is required by paragraph 1(7) of Schedule 4 and confirms that the process remained within the statutory framework for post-making amendments. The formal powers used here are section 119 of the Planning Act 2008 together with paragraph 1(4) and paragraph 1(8) of Schedule 4. The correction order was signed on behalf of the Secretary of State for Transport by Natasha Kopala, Head of the Transport and Works Act Orders Unit, on 22 May 2026.
Article 2 is narrow in its legal effect. It states that the parent order is corrected in line with a schedule that identifies where each amendment is made, how it is made, and the text to be substituted, inserted or omitted. For planning lawyers and consenting teams, that structure is familiar. A correction order does not usually restate the full scheme or re-run the planning case. Instead, it amends the parent instrument at specific points, and the corrected wording then becomes the text that should be read and applied.
That matters because even small drafting errors in a development consent order can affect interpretation, drafting certainty and day-to-day project administration. Advisers, promoters, local authorities and any party working from the original instrument should now read S.I. 2026/556 alongside S.I. 2026/537 and update any internal copies or references. Where project teams are using extracts from the earlier order in advice notes, compliance trackers or contract documentation, those references should be checked against the correction schedule. The legal position from 27 May 2026 is the amended text, not the uncorrected wording.
The explanatory note attached to the instrument is concise but clear. It states that the order corrects errors and omissions in the earlier A46 Coventry Junctions (Walsgrave) Development Consent Order 2026 following a request made under paragraph 1(5)(a) of Schedule 4 to the 2008 Act. For readers tracking the Planning Act regime, the wider significance is procedural rather than political. The case shows how the DCO system deals with post-making defects through a formal statutory route, without reopening the substance of the decision. On that basis, the A46 Coventry Walsgrave consent remains in place, but it must now be read as corrected from 27 May 2026.