Find Key Cases
Browse key cases using the filter for either ‘Contravention type’ OR ‘Issue’. Alternatively, use the ‘Search…’ box to find cases through a custom query.
Cases on the site currently cover parking, bus lane, moving traffic and road user charging, including the London Congestion Charge and Clean Air Zones (outside London). More cases and contravention types will be added in due course.
Please note: All adjudicator decisions included on this website are in the public domain. While they have been curated together here for the convenience and interest of users, any information contained within the decisions remains the responsibility of the original adjudicating body. Any questions relating to the content of cases should also be directed to the adjudicating body.
Mr M – v – East Hertfordshire District Council
(ET00005-2503)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2025-04-23
Outcome: Dismissed
A procedural error that does not resulting in unfairness does not amount to a procedural impropriety. The intention of Parliament could not have been that an inconsequential error would defeat the substantive purpose of the legislative scheme. This decision applies the judgment in Glasgow City Council v The Upper Tribunal of Scotland [2025].
Mr S – v- Cardiff County Council
(QC00236-2409)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2024-10-28
Outcome: Dismissed
This case clarifies that the relevant traffic regulations apply to the motorist, even if they cannot read or understand English. It is incumbent on the motorist to observe and comply with lawfully marked restrictions. A failure to understand them, or a lack of knowledge, cannot amount to a ground of appeal.
Mr D – v – Blackpool Borough Council
(BP00066-2409)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2024-10-22
Outcome: Dismissed
This case clarifies that there is no concept of a ‘near miss’ in public law. That the motorist entered a bus lane shortly before time restrictions were lifted is mitigation, not a ground of appeal.
Mrs H – v -Borough of Broxbourne Council
(BK00009-2404)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2024-04-24
Outcome: Dismissed
This case clarifies that a motorist is expected to be aware of the prohibition against parking adjacent to a dropped footway (which applies at all times), even without the presence of signs or road markings. The dropped footway prohibition also applies when the carriageway has been raised to meet the footway.
Also made clear is that the discount period for payment of a parking PCN applies for 14 days, though the council has a discretion to extend the discount period.
Mr M – v – Slough Borough Council
(SB00012-2402)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2024-03-16
Outcome: Dismissed
This case clarifies that a vehicle is parked even if the motorist remains in the vehicle with the engine running, and that stopping, waiting or parking on double yellow lines in order to receive a telephone call is not permitted.
The original adjudicator’s decision is accessible from the button below.
The subsequent review is available here. This review references Schwarz – vs – The London Borough of Camden (2010000692), accessible on this site here.
A further application for judicial review to the High Court was rejected on the same issues.
English (UK) 
Cymraeg