Navigating Gateways 2 and 3: What this means for Rights of Light Insurance

The full implementation of the Building Safety Act 2022 represents a profound shift in the regulatory framework for higher-risk residential buildings (HRBs). Following the Grenfell Tower tragedy, this legislation introduces new compliance requirements, with Gateway 2 and Gateway 3 now fully operational as of October 2023. For developers, funders, and insurers, the implications are significant, particularly when it comes to rights of light exposure and the structuring of indemnity insurance.

Understanding the New Gateway Regime

The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) now oversees a three-stage Gateway approval process for HRBs:

  • Gateway 1 (already in force since 2021): Ensures fire safety considerations are integrated at the planning stage.
  • Gateway 2 (pre-construction): Requires detailed building control approval from the BSR before any construction activity can commence.
  • Gateway 3 (completion to occupation): Prohibits legal occupation until a formal completion certificate has been issued, confirming full compliance and a complete safety information trail, often referred to as the “golden thread”.

While Gateway 1 was already embedded in planning processes, Gateways 2 and 3 are introducing new regulatory checkpoints that affect both project timelines and insurance placement strategies.

How Gateways 2 and 3 Affect Development Programmes

The introduction of Gateways 2 and 3 effectively adds two regulatory inflection points into the development lifecycle:

  • Gateway 2 introduces a mandatory review period of up to 12 weeks before construction can begin. In practice, developers are experiencing delays of 6 to 12 weeks at this stage.
  • Gateway 3 introduces a further post-completion delay of 6 to 16 weeks while the BSR reviews compliance and documentation before issuing final approval for occupation.

These delays affect not only programme sequencing and cashflow but also increase exposure to legal and planning risks during extended pre-construction and post-completion windows.

Implications for Rights of Light Insurance

The new regulatory framework has direct consequences for rights of light underwriters and policyholders.

Extended Pre-Construction Risk

The Gateway 2 approval requirement creates a longer gap between planning consent and the start of construction. This period is often when rights of light policies are incepted, yet now it carries increased exposure:

  • Claimants have more time to assess the development’s impact and lodge objections or claims.
  • The post-planning window becomes fertile ground for speculative claims, particularly from those monitoring planning portals or acting opportunistically.
  • Where scheme designs are revised to satisfy BSR feedback, underwriters may require updated assessments or revised pricing, introducing further complexity and uncertainty.
Prolonged Post-Completion Exposure

Gateway 3 delays occupation, extending the period during which a completed building remains vacant:

  • Courts may still consider injunctive relief if the building is not yet occupied, though the likelihood remains low.
  • Any post-completion design changes required to achieve Gateway 3 certification could increase light interference and trigger re-underwriting.
The Underwriting Outlook

Given the structural changes introduced by the Gateway regime, underwriters are already adapting their approach. This includes:

  • Closer scrutiny of project timelines, particularly binding dates relative to Gateway approvals.
  • Adjusting pricing models to reflect longer periods of exposure.
  • Reassessing how “trigger points” are defined, with an increased focus on the distinction between practical completion and first lawful occupation.
  • Reviewing policy durations and coverage terms to ensure that protection extends through the actual risk period.

A Call for Collaboration and Flexibility

Navigating the Gateway system requires a coordinated approach between developers, legal teams, surveyors, brokers, and insurers. Key considerations include:

  • Early engagement to assess how design changes driven by BSR feedback may affect rights of light analysis.
  • Enhanced clarity around milestone definitions, particularly where phased occupation or complex handovers are involved.

At Continuum Specialty, we recognise that the legislative landscape is evolving. Our underwriting approach is structured to support clients through uncertainty, providing bespoke indemnity solutions that align with both regulatory compliance and development objectives.

Conclusion

The Gateways introduced by the Building Safety Act 2022 are transforming how higher-risk residential developments are brought to market. For developers, they introduce new compliance stages and potential delays. For rights of light insurers, they increase the need for precise policy structuring.

In this changing environment, the key to continuity is flexibility. By aligning insurance coverage with project milestones and engaging early with all stakeholders, developers can continue to move forward with confidence.

To explore how Rights of Light insurance can support your clients’ projects, contact our underwriting team at underwriters@continuumspecialty.com

 

More From Our Blog

Uncategorized

12 Jun 2026

Legal Challenges and Ireland’s Data Centre Growth: Delivery Risk in a Power-Constrained Market

Ireland has become one of Europe’s most important data centre markets. Its attractiveness is clear: a strong technology ecosystem, access to transatlantic connectivity, a favourable business environment and a concentration of major global technology companies.But Ireland’s data centre success is now facing a familiar infrastructure problem: demand is moving faster than the legal, planning and energy systems required to support it.Recent legal challenges to Ireland’s data centre policy underline the issue. Environmental groups have challenged the regulatory framework for connecting large energy users to the grid, arguing that rules allowing new data centres to rely on fossil-fuel generation conflict with climate obligations. The Irish High Court has granted leave for such a challenge to proceed.For developers, investors, lenders and their legal advisers, this is not simply an Irish data centre story. It is a case study in how government policy, climate law, grid capacity and judicial review risk can collide.

Michael Turland

Uncategorized

12 Jun 2026

When Community Opposition Becomes a Brake on London’s Progress

London has always evolved through tension.Every major change to the capital, from new housing and transport infrastructure to hospitality, cultural venues and mixed-use regeneration, sits at the intersection of competing interests. Residents want amenity, safety and a sense of place. Businesses need certainty, footfall and operating flexibility. Developers require planning confidence, investable timelines and a regulatory environment that supports delivery.That balance is not easy. Nor should it be. Local engagement is a vital part of the planning and licensing system. Communities must have a voice where development affects noise, light, heritage, public realm, safety and quality of life.But recent debate around Soho highlights a more difficult question for London: what happens when local opposition moves from scrutiny to obstruction?

Michael Turland

Rights of Light

27 May 2026

Tall Buildings in Manchester: Growth, Policy and Development Risk

Manchester’s skyline has changed significantly over the past decade. What was once a city defined largely by mid-rise commercial, civic and industrial buildings is now increasingly shaped by residential towers, mixed-use developments and high-density regeneration schemes. Recent coverage of Manchester’s tall building boom reflects a wider point: the city’s vertical growth is no longer incidental. It is now central to Manchester’s development story. Recent market reporting suggests Manchester has one of the largest tall building pipelines outside London. Barbour ABI’s High Rise Construction Market Report has been cited as identifying more than 200 towers over 50 metres, including 26 buildings over 100 metres and 10 over 150 metres. In 2017, Manchester reportedly had only four buildings over 100 metres. For developers, funders and legal advisers, this raises an important question. How can growth be delivered at scale while managing the legal, planning and neighbourly risks that inevitably arise in a denser urban environment?

Continuum Specialty

Judicial Review

27 May 2026

New Lottery Company v Gambling Commission: High Court reinforces the high bar for procurement challenges

The High Court’s decision in New Lottery Company v Gambling Commission [2026] EWHC 891 (TCC) provides an important reminder of the evidential and legal burden facing claimants in complex procurement disputes. The case arose from the award of the fourth UK National Lottery Licence to Allwyn. The incumbent operator’s bid vehicle, New Lottery Company, challenged the procurement process, including the evaluation and scoring of bids, as well as subsequent modifications made to the licence after award. Damages of up to £1.3 billion were reportedly sought. The Court dismissed the claims in their entirety. For lawyers, public bodies, developers, investors and other stakeholders involved in regulated procurement processes, the judgment is significant. It reinforces the Court’s reluctance to interfere with complex procurement evaluations unless there is a clear legal basis to do so. It also highlights the commercial impact that procurement challenges can have, even where they ultimately fail.

Michael Turland

Judicial Review

27 May 2026

Spain’s Energy Transition: Progress, Pressure and System Risk

Spain has emerged as one of Europe’s leading renewable energy markets. Rapid deployment of solar and wind generation, combined with reduced exposure to imported gas, has positioned the country as a central case study in the European energy transition.For policymakers, investors and infrastructure participants, Spain has increasingly been viewed as evidence that decarbonisation and energy security can be pursued simultaneously. Lower wholesale electricity prices, significant renewable capacity growth and continued policy support have reinforced that narrative.However, the nationwide blackout on 28 April 2025 introduced a more complex discussion.While initial commentary sought to attribute the outage to the high penetration of renewable energy within the system, subsequent analysis has pointed elsewhere. The incident instead highlighted a broader issue facing multiple European markets: whether grid infrastructure, operational systems and regulatory frameworks are evolving quickly enough to support large-scale renewable deployment.For lawyers, lenders, insurers and developers, this distinction matters.The key legal and commercial risks in the energy transition are increasingly moving beyond the question of whether projects can be developed. The focus is shifting toward whether energy systems can operate reliably, flexibly and accountably at scale.

Continuum Specialty

Judicial Review

27 May 2026

Germany’s Renewable Energy Market in 2026: Growth, Litigation Risk and the Role of Insurance

Germany remains one of Europe’s most important renewable energy markets. With ambitious 2030 targets, continued growth in wind and solar, and increasing focus on battery energy storage systems, the direction of travel is clear.The German market is moving at scale.Renewable installed capacity increased by nearly 21 GW in 2025, reaching just under 210 GW in total. Renewables also accounted for around 55% of gross electricity consumption, against Germany’s target of 80% by 2030.For developers, lenders and legal advisers, this creates significant opportunity. However, it also brings a familiar challenge: the gap between policy ambition and project delivery.Permitting reform may support faster deployment, but litigation risk continues to affect renewable energy schemes. Legal challenges can delay construction, require project modifications and create additional, unbudgeted costs before any final judgment is reached.For lawyers advising on renewable energy projects, the question is no longer simply whether a permit can be obtained. It is whether the project can withstand the financial consequences of challenge, suspension and interruption.

Michael Turland