TfL Legal Advice

MQT on 2007-05-23
Session date: 
May 23, 2007
Question By: 
Roger Evans
GLA Conservatives
Asked Of: 
The Mayor


What legal advice has TfL received with regard to people who have been issued with PCNs for not paying the congestion charge, arguing that the Bill of Rights 1689 prevents TfL from levying fines without a trial? How many people have successfully invoked this defence?


Answer for TfL Legal Advice

Answer for TfL Legal Advice

Answered By: 
The Mayor

TfL's legal advice is that the Bill of Rights 1689 argument cannot be used to avoid civil penalties and does not affect subsequent Road Traffic legislation or the issue and enforcement of penalty charges. The Court of Appeal has recently refused an application for permission to appeal a High Court decision (R on the application of De Crittenden -v- NPAS [2006] EWCA Civ 1786) which concerned a parking violation. At first instance in the High Court, Mr Justice Collins refused permission for a judicial review to be brought on the grounds that the Bill of Rights makes it illegal to impose any penalty or fine for road traffic violations, in respect of a decision made by an NPAS adjudicator. In refusing the application, he commented that it was "a completely baseless argument". Congestion Charging has consistently rejected representations made on this basis and has not lost an appeal where this argument has been used to challenge a Penalty Charge Notice.