header-logo header-logo

18 October 2013 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7580 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Resident evil?

istock_000022050289medium

Resident parking: milking cash cows or lawful charging? Nicholas Dobson reports

On 22 July Barnet Council was caught with its parking permits down. For it was then that Mrs Justice Lang in the Administrative Court ruled as unlawful the Authority’s decision substantially to increase charges for residents’ parking permits and visitor vouchers in the Borough’s Controlled Parking Zones (CPZ) ( R (Attfield) v London Borough of Barnet [2013] EWHC 2089 (Admin)).

The case was brought by a resident; solicitor David Attfield (the claimant). The claim followed the council’s decision on 14 February 2011 to increase the cost of a resident’s permit for a first car from £40 to £100 and for visitor vouchers from £1 to £4. Following the judgment, The Times reported Attfield remarking that “Barnet Council has been caught picking the pockets of CPZ residents”. For “despite making up less than 10% of the borough, [CPZ residents] were being made to contribute disproportionately to a range of services such as road repairs and the provision of bus passes across the borough”.

The claimant’s key contention was that the particular charge increase was unlawful

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll