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 S – v – Medway Council
(MW00034-2601)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2026-02-26
Outcome: Dismissed
This case clarifies two important aspects relating to yellow box junctions and their enforcement:
- The configuration of a box junction is a matter for the council, but there is an expectation that an explanation will be provided for any deviation from the Traffic Signs Manual [opens external link].
- A vehicle stopping in a marked box junction, however briefly, will give rise to a contravention. The council is not obliged to show that an obstruction was caused.
The case also makes clear that only the complete failure by an authority to consider representations against a penalty charge notice would allow procedural impropriety (based on an authority failing to consider representations) to be established as a ground of appeal under the regulations.
Mr M – v – Southampton City Council
(SN00091-2507)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2025-08-07
Outcome: Dismissed
This case clarifies that private hire vehicle (PHV) drivers are not entitled to stop at a bus stop to allow passengers to board or alight. This is a stopping contravention with no period of grace.
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 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 here.
A further application for judicial review to the High Court was rejected on the same issues.
Mr H – v – Nottingham City Council
(NG00056-2402)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2024-03-13
Outcome: Dismissed
This case highlights and clarifies a number of issues:
- Signs and lines must adequately advise the motorist of the restriction, but do not need to be in pristine condition. Substantial compliance with the regulations is sufficient, but signs must not mislead or fail to inform.
- There is no requirement on the civil enforcement officer to record the model of the vehicle.
- The blue badge concession does not apply when waiting restrictions are in force. When no waiting restrictions are in force, the clock must be set to the time of arrival and three hours parking time is permitted.
- There is no right to an observation period or period of grace.
- The 50% discount is offered to the penalty charge notice only – any further discount is at the council’s discretion.
- The authority has a period of six months to serve the Notice to Owner.