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 – Secretary of the Transport
(IO00731-2504)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2025-05-14
Outcome: Allowed
This case makes clear that there is no time limit for issuing the road user charging penalty charge notice under the regulations and that – on receipt of representations against the penalty charge notice – the authority seeking to reject those representations must issue a Notice of Rejection within 56 days. That notice must include the required information detailed under the regulations.
If a Notice of Rejection is not served, the authority is deemed to have accepted the representations. Re-issuing the penalty charge notice to allow for a further period of discount does not remove the authority’s obligation to issue a valid Notice of Rejection in response to representations.
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 P – v – Bradford Council
(DY00313-2502)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2025-03-05
Outcome: Dismissed
This case clarifies that it is the DVLA registered keeper of the vehicle (who may not be the owner) at the time of the contravention who remains liable to the charging authority for the Clean Air Zone charge and penalty.
Mr M – v – Birmingham City Council
(KW00360-2502)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2025-02-26
Outcome: Dismissed
This case highlights that if a motorist makes a clean air zone payment to an unofficial website, they remain responsible to the charging authority for the penalty and charge. While in this case the motorist did not intend to avoid the charge, the circumstances described amount to mitigation that the adjudicator does not have the power to take into account. The authority is entitled to enforce the full penalty amount.
Mr A – v – Birmingham City Council
(KW03291-2411)
Traffic Penalty Tribunal
Decision Date: 2024-12-04
Outcome: Dismissed
This case clarifies that a clean air zone charge applies from midnight to midnight. A vehicle remaining in a zone after 11.59pm becomes liable for the following day’s charge, even if the vehicle only remains in the zone for a limited period after midnight, and only due to heavy traffic. The circumstances described in this and such a case do not provide a ground of appeal under the statutory fixed penalty scheme. They amount to mitigation that the adjudicator does not have the power to consider.
English (UK) 
Cymraeg