Makda, R (on the application of) v The Parking Adjudictor

Makda, R (on the application of) v The Parking Adjudictor

The adjudicators erred in law by failing to consider whether the time the claimant's vehicle was stationary was necessary for enabling the passenger to board, as required by Article 12. The correct legal test is whether the waiting was necessary for that purpose, not whether the passenger actually arrived.

Parties
Claimant: The Queen on the Application of Makda; Defendant: The Parking Adjudicator
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed; decisions quashed and appeals to be allowed
Legal Topics
Parking Enforcement, Statutory Interpretation, Judicial Review, Civil Penalties
Administrative Law Transport Law Parking Enforcement Statutory Interpretation Judicial Review Civil Penalties

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen on the Application of Makda

Claimant

The Parking Adjudicator

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the exemption in Article 12 of the City of Westminster Traffic Management Order 2002 applied to the claimant's conduct
  2. 2 Whether the parking adjudicators erred in law in their interpretation and application of Article 12

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicators erred in law by failing to consider whether the time the claimant's vehicle was stationary was necessary for enabling the passenger to board, as required by Article 12. The correct legal test is whether the waiting was necessary for that purpose, not whether the passenger actually arrived.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; decisions quashed and appeals to be allowed

Orders

  • Both review decisions of the parking adjudicators quashed
  • Both underlying decisions of Mr Houghton quashed