The National Parking Adjudication Service, in a case between Anthony Michael Higgins and Sefton Borough Council, has rejected the Bill of Rights defence that he used.
The full decision is in the post below.
Any comments would be appreciated and it may now give the opportunity for someone to take the matter to Judicial Review on a point of law.
Monday, September 05, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2005
(445)
-
▼
September
(46)
- Evidence to the House of Commons Transport Committee
- Department of Constitutional Affairs......Nothing ...
- EU Flag? ...Not here...Second Front Page of the Day
- Another Parking Ticket Victory...Another Front Page
- First the Ashes...Now EU Beaten...Another Victory ...
- No fines without court appearance
- Pressure is on to evict assembly
- Eleanor Sharpston QC...You be the Judge
- Lib Dems agree with Herron
- Unelected assembly slammed
- Response from NPAS
- NPAS wriggles and squirms
- NPAS under more pressure
- Constitutional Storm Clouds Gather over Sunderland
- Complaint to Law Society about NPAS
- Will the Aussies now have their tape measures out?
- Call to scrap parking panel
- NPAS on shaky ground
- Gallows being prepared in Sunderland
- Press Release: National Parking Adjudicator Mislea...
- Investigation into Sunderland City Council / Natio...
- Driven to complain
- Probe into parking tickets blunder
- Government Office plays Pontius Pilate
- Constitutional Confrontation drawing closer...Comm...
- Further Questions as National Parking Adjudicator ...
- No justice in parking 'court'
- The Clock is Ticking Sunderland...why so long?
- Victory...HM Customs and Excise back down after Bi...
- Robin Rocky De Crittenden dying to get in the ring
- Rocky De Crittenden throws down the gauntlet
- Give 'em a pint and they'll take a kilometre
- Worcester City Council now facing NPAS Challenge
- Legal papers served on Sunderland Council
- NPAS 'Independent'...bet you 60p a ticket that the...
- Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council unlawfully i...
- Metric Martyrs Wrongly Convicted...A Miscarriage o...
- Bill of Rights 1689...NPAS Decision
- Bill of Rights Decision by NPAS Adjudicator
- Did the UK Metrication Association lie? You decide
- NPAS...THAT Telephone call...what was said...and t...
- Letter to Caroline Shepherd NPAS Chief Adjudicator...
- Letter to Andrew Barfoot NPAS Tribunal Manager Reg...
- NPAS Decision...Taxi Ranks
- Letter of Apology from NPAS Chief Adjudicator
- Letter of Apology from NPAS Tribunal Manager
-
▼
September
(46)
4 comments:
Hi Neil,
I believe the point of this appeal was not so much a complaint against the issuing of a ticket but rather a challenge to the legality of issuing a fixed penalty without a court hearing.
The way I read the judgement is that the Adjudicator agrees with the Laws' ruling that the 1689 Bill of Rights cannot be impliedly repealed. In his opinion, the tribunal is a court and so the 1689 Act is satisified.
However, surely this ruling suggests that the Act can only be satisfied by the tribunal ruling on all parking ticket cases and not just those appealed?
Hi Neil,
I believe the point of this appeal was not so much a complaint against the issuing of a ticket but rather a challenge to the legality of issuing a fixed penalty without a court hearing.
The way I read the judgement is that the Adjudicator agrees with the Laws' ruling that the 1689 Bill of Rights cannot be impliedly repealed. In his opinion, the tribunal is a court and so the 1689 Act is satisified.
However, surely this ruling suggests that the Act can only be satisfied by the tribunal ruling on all parking ticket cases and not just those appealed?
The wording I would use in response to the "Sefton" case quoted by some authorities:
"Please note: this is not an appeal against a fine. This is a legal challenge against an apparent attempt to extort money."
AND: (nearly forgot)...
A conviction is neccesary under the 1689 act BEFORE any fine or forfieture can be imposed.
Post a Comment