DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
*****************************************************
#Post#: 10598--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: November 19, 2023, 7:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
>
> If not a designated parking place, then which part of para. 3
to Part 2 of Schedule 7 applies?
>
--- End Quote ---
3(2)(b), as per Christopher Phipps v NEPP - Essex County Council
(IF00014-2211, 17 February 2023)
HTML https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1w5IDGdNrhpEmwMCKuu5xWvKmDiial3se,<br
/>upheld on review in Christopher Phipps v NEPP - Essex County
Council (IF00014-2211, 24 March 2023)
HTML https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1AV1NlcBxcEBvYFAzh4lMxYUm_JnwVfCQ.
#Post#: 10610--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: John U.K.
Date: November 19, 2023, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
See also
HTML https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/parking-restrictions-red-routes-london-bus-tfl-high-court-ruling-b1121162.html
(Hat tip to MMV Redux )
#Post#: 10735--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: November 20, 2023, 12:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
My question related to 'designated parking bays' and the issues,
albeit separate from CCTV, that were raised by PMB.
As far as I can see, this adjudication decision relates to OGL
and waiting/stopping, not designated parking places under s.45
RTRA.
#Post#: 10771--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: November 20, 2023, 5:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: H C Andersen link ---
>
>
> My question related to 'designated parking bays' and the
issues, albeit separate from CCTV, that were raised by PMB.
>
> As far as I can see, this adjudication decision relates to OGL
and waiting/stopping, not designated parking places under s.45
RTRA.
>
--- End Quote ---
But the principle is the same, the waiting provisions of para 3
of the Schedule covers stopping (Mr Chan has told me he agrees
with that).
#Post#: 11747--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: December 2, 2023, 6:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> I've just heard that TfL have won the judicial review, the
interested parties have until Thursday to ask for permission to
appeal.
>
--- End Quote ---
Personally, I have no faith in the justice system. In this case
below*, the guy went to the Court of Appeal and Lord Justice
Simon ordered him to pay the Traffic Penalty Tribunal! And
refused to amend. The High Court Judge ordered him to pay the
Council! Sadly, his application to the European Court was
received a day late! :(
One has a better chance of being reimbursed for a flight delay
and/or cancellation under EC261/2004 8)
*C1/2014/4207 (High Court ref: CO/3449/2014‏)
#Post#: 11758--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: December 2, 2023, 8:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Hippocrates link ---
>
> [quote author=cp8759 link=topic=326.msg10420#msg10420
date=1700218281]
> I've just heard that TfL have won the judicial review, the
interested parties have until Thursday to ask for permission to
appeal.
>
--- End Quote ---
Personally, I have no faith in the justice system.
[/quote]
Last time I ran the numbers, I'd won 91.36% of all cases in the
sample period I looked at. Taking this morning as an example,
I've won 6 cases and one has been adjourned to give the council
an opportunity to respond. I wonder how much faith local
authorities have in the justice system?
#Post#: 11771--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: December 2, 2023, 11:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: cp8759 link ---
>
> [quote author=Hippocrates link=topic=326.msg11747#msg11747
date=1701521424]
> [quote author=cp8759 link=topic=326.msg10420#msg10420
date=1700218281]
> I've just heard that TfL have won the judicial review, the
interested parties have until Thursday to ask for permission to
appeal.
>
--- End Quote ---
Personally, I have no faith in the justice system.
[/quote]
Last time I ran the numbers, I'd won 91.36% of all cases in the
sample period I looked at. Taking this morning as an example,
I've won 6 cases and one has been adjourned to give the council
an opportunity to respond. I wonder how much faith local
authorities have in the justice system?
[/quote]
Good question. I would rephrase it: I wonder how much faith
they have in their staff? My statement above is specific to the
top end of the system. And, it was indeed "unfortunate" that a
certain person was not granted the right to speak in the TFL
Review case. In the other case, I wonder whether the judge had
even read all the paperwork since a clear error occurred. It is
simply not good enough to order an appellant/claimant to pay the
wrong body!
#Post#: 12102--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: Hippocrates
Date: December 8, 2023, 1:02 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, today at a hearing, Mr Chan made his views quite clear
concerning the High Court decision and said that "he was stuck
with it."
#Post#: 14526--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: January 29, 2024, 8:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just got this from TFL:
[indent]
The legal costs paid for this case were £112,674.50.
[/indent]
If we add the £46,200 incurred at the tribunal, that's a total
of £158,874.50.
And they didn't even get everything they wanted.
#Post#: 14545--------------------------------------------------
Re: TFL judicial review
DIR By: andy_foster
Date: January 29, 2024, 12:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As their KC was mostly spouting bollox (to the exasperation of
the judge) and had to be lead by the judge as to which door to
push against, I feel that they got poor value for money.
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 7
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page