DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
*****************************************************
#Post#: 50951--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: ivanleo
Date: December 24, 2024, 6:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> The point of my question was how can the unregulated private
parking company (UPPC) "initiate" a private prosecution in the
magistrates court (under the SJP or otherwise) and that has been
answered, thank you. They can't.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not sure that's correct, as far as I'm aware they can lay an
information and obtain a summons, just as you could.
#Post#: 50970--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: b789
Date: December 24, 2024, 10:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So the parking company or even a private individual could "lay
an information" (I live and learn) but surely it would rely on
whether the court believed it serves the public interest and
that there is a realistic prospect of conviction? Surely a minor
parking violation is unlikely to be seen as a serious offence
unless it causes significant disruption, danger, or financial
loss.
Do magistrates not take into consideration the waste of time and
resources, especially f the alleged parking contravention posed
no real harm or inconvenience to others? Don't they have to
consider whether cases are worthy of court time? Using criminal
prosecution for a trivial matter surely must be viewed as
disproportionate, or are we dealing with the "judge bingo" we
occasionally see in the county court?
Could it backfire on the "private prosecutor" if the case is
considered to be deemed frivolous, vexatious, or without merit?
A minor and isolated parking issue with no significant
consequences should be seen as an inappropriate use of the
court’s time. Prosecuting minor parking infractions in criminal
court risks being perceived as overzealous or petty, especially
if it imposes unnecessary burdens on the legal system.
Finally, as there would be no financial benefit for the private
company, can anyone ever see a firm like APCOA or SABA actually
spending time and resources on an action with no guaranteed
outcome and, even if successful, would not earn them a penny and
most likely would cost them substantially?
So, the answer to my initial question is "yes, they can".
However, in the three or four years I've been dealing with
Parking Charge Notices from unregulated private parking
companies, only APCOA and SABA have issued Penalty Notices for
alleged breaches of railway bylaws and I have not come across a
single one that has ever been prosecuted in the magistrates
court.
They would have to "lay an information" to the court and only if
the court is satisfied that the case is suitable for the SJP
process or requires a full hearing would it proceed. From what I
can understand, cases brought by Public Prosecutors for minor
offences are commonly handled under the SJP. However, are
Private prosecutions different? Should courts be more cautious
about using the SJP for private prosecutions because the process
is less transparent and private prosecutors should be subject to
stricter scrutiny to ensure fairness?
Even if the case were "approved", would a standard summons
rather than an SJP notice be used? From what I can see, the SJP
is typically reserved for public prosecutions or routine minor
offences handled by government bodies.
Whilst they may be able to initiate a private prosecution, they
have never (as far as I am aware and able to research) handed a
case to the TOC to prosecute nor have they prosecuted one
themselves. Their greed far outweighs any public interest or
concern for the law for them to have an ounce of altruism. They
are not used to having to provide evidence that has to prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that the recipient of their fake PN
has broken any law, civil or criminal.
#Post#: 50971--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: 666
Date: December 24, 2024, 10:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
>
> They would have to "lay an information" to the court and only
if the court is satisfied that the case is suitable for the SJP
process or requires a full hearing would it proceed. From what I
can understand, cases brought by Public Prosecutors for minor
offences are commonly handled under the SJP. However, are
Private prosecutions different? Should courts be more cautious
about using the SJP for private prosecutions because the process
is less transparent and private prosecutors should be subject to
stricter scrutiny to ensure fairness?
>
>
--- End Quote ---
Under the SJP, all cases where a NOT guilty plea is entered are
automatically referred to a full court hearing, so there should
be no concerns over transparency or fairness.
#Post#: 50973--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: andy_foster
Date: December 24, 2024, 10:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Public prosecutors cannot lay an information. They can only
issue a Written Charge and SJPN or Postal Requisition. Others
can only lay an information. AFAIK the SJP is exclusive to cases
instigated by way of SJPN.
#Post#: 50974--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: b789
Date: December 24, 2024, 10:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight... the prosecutor, public or
private, submits the "written charge" to the court and serves an
SJPN to the defendant. The defendant responds (guilty plea, not
guilty plea, or no response). If no plea is entered, the
magistrate may decide the case on the papers. If the defendant
pleads not guilty, the case is transferred to a full
Magistrates’ Court hearing.
Could a private prosecutor issue a "postal requisition"? Isn't
this basically a court "summons" and requires the defendant to
attend a court hearing in person? Does this require the courts
permission before it can be issued?
#Post#: 50976--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: andy_foster
Date: December 24, 2024, 11:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Drugs are bad, m'kay?
#Post#: 50980--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: Southpaw82
Date: December 24, 2024, 12:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> So let me get this straight... the prosecutor, public or
private, submits the "written charge" to the court and serves an
SJPN to the defendant. The defendant responds (guilty plea, not
guilty plea, or no response). If no plea is entered, the
magistrate may decide the case on the papers. If the defendant
pleads not guilty, the case is transferred to a full
Magistrates’ Court hearing.
>
> Could a private prosecutor issue a "postal requisition"? Isn't
this basically a court "summons" and requires the defendant to
attend a court hearing in person? Does this require the courts
permission before it can be issued?
>
--- End Quote ---
No. You really need to read what has been written. Only an
authorised prosecutor can issue a written charge. A written
charge is a prerequisite for a requisition or SJPN. Ergo, no
SJPN can follow where an information has been laid, i.e. by a
private prosecutor.
Equally, a court issuing a summons will not generally attempt to
apply the Code Test for Crown Prosecutors, because that usurps
the function of the prosecutor. There is no different standard
between a private prosecutor and a “proper” prosecutor (at least
as far as the law is concerned).
#Post#: 50982--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: b789
Date: December 24, 2024, 12:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I am trying to understand what has been written but the waters
keep getting muddied by some terminology. For example you
mention "authorised prosecutor" and "private prosecutor". Is a
"private prosecutor" not the same?
So far we have "private", "public" and now "authorised"
prosecutors.
If I now understand correctly, if a "private" prosecutor lays an
information to the court, no SJPN is issued. Is a summons then
issued by the court instead?
I am simply trying to understand the exact process the private
parking company would have to follow in order to obtain a
private prosecution in the magistrates court for a minor parking
offence which is in breach of the railway bylaws.
#Post#: 50983--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: Southpaw82
Date: December 24, 2024, 12:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> If I now understand correctly, if a "private" prosecutor lays
an information to the court, no SJPN is issued. Is a summons
then issued by the court instead?
>
--- End Quote ---
Bingo.
#Post#: 50986--------------------------------------------------
Re: Can a private company initiate a criminal prosecution under
the SJP?
DIR By: b789
Date: December 24, 2024, 2:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OK. So, assuming if APCOA wanted to actually prosecute their PN
themselves rather than handing it to the TOC to prosecute,
someone from the private company has to act as the prosecutor.
Does that person have to have any formal or legal training to be
able to act as a prosecutor?
Does the prosecutor lay the information to the court that they
are intending to prosecute the defendant for beaching railway
bylaw 14.2 under bylaw 24(1) even though they are not an
"authorised prosecutor"?
I'm assuming that APCOA would need authorisation from the TOC to
initiate the prosecution. How would the court view the fact that
the TOC are not taking the lead?
Would the contract APCOA have with the TOC to manage the car
park have to specify exactly what authorisation it has to issue
a PN under railway bylaws and specify how prosecution of those
PNs takes place? As I mentioned earlier, I have not yet seen any
contract that APCOA has with a TOC that mentions PNs, only
Parking Charge Notices and that was due to them mistakenly not
submitting their usual "letter of authority confirmation" that
POPLA take as sufficient evidence of authorisation.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page