Is there a legal definition of 'parking' vs 'stopping' vs 'dropping off'?

[Lambie7]

It beggars belief that they put up a sign which says 'no stopping' when you have to stop to read the bl**dy sign!
Catch 22 or what!

Surely if the barrier is installed and controlled by the same parking company that isssues the penalty for stopping at that barrier, that is not illegal? Is it not some form of entrapment?

[charitynjw]

Surely if the barrier is installed and controlled by the same parking company that isssues the penalty for stopping at that barrier, that is not illegal? Is it not some form of entrapment?

Hi Lambie
In the matter of private parking co's, it's not a penalty, it's a (civil law) contractual damage for alleged breach.

Oh, btw, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM2K7sV-K74

[Lambie7]

Very good, charitynjw, it took me a while to spot your LOL, to use the current vernacular.
I remember seeing that at the cinema the first time round. I got cramp laughing.

"In the matter of private parking co's, it's not a penalty, it's a (civil law) contractual damage for alleged breach".

Yes, but they are enforcing Byelaws, so surely it's The Law, not a contract?

Whetever the words used, my point is how can it be legal to trap someone into doing something, then fine / charge / issue a penalty / whatever for doing it?

I hope you will appreciate that like most people in the UK, I am ignorant of the finer points of Law, other than those accumulated on my driving record. My sum knowledge of court procedure is gleaned from occasionally chuckling at Rumpole !

[charitynjw]

Very good, charitynjw, it took me a while to spot your LOL, to use the current vernacular.
I remember seeing that at the cinema the first time round. I got cramp laughing.

"In the matter of private parking co's, it's not a penalty, it's a (civil law) contractual damage for alleged breach".

Yes, but they are enforcing Byelaws, so surely it's The Law, not a contract?
From post #1

I received a Parking Charge Notice for £100 from this company

So I reckon it's a private parking (civil) matter, not a penalty charge.

Whetever the words used, my point is how can it be legal to trap someone into doing something, then fine / charge / issue a penalty / whatever for doing it?

I hope you will appreciate that like most people in the UK, I am ignorant of the finer points of Law, other than those accumulated on my driving record. My sum knowledge of court procedure is gleaned from occasionally chuckling at Rumpole !

https://www.iclr.co.uk/wp-content/up...ole_speech.jpg

[ostell]

You can keep this running for years. Perhaps you could make use of Jopson v Homeguard, an appeal court case where the judge commented that stopping and loading/unloading was not parking.

[Lambie7]

I have now properly read the the 2009 Byelaws, and the light bulb has come on. I think.
I didn't realise that the part of the Byelaws relating to parking etc. was separated out from the rest which are subject to the Criminal Justice Act, with a scale of fines and so on.
The parking section is treated differently, in that contravention of the regulations is specifically dealt with by means of parking charges, clamping, or towing; but crucially, such contraventions are not classed as offences under the law, therefore cannot be enforced through the courts, or challenged in court. Thus there is no route to contest the charge other than through the 'independent' (yeah, right) appeals service.

Is my understanding correct?

[R0b]

The right for airport operators to make byelaws and enforce them is subject to the enabling act, being the Airports Act 1986 (Section 63). Helpfully, Section 64 says that any person contravening a byelaw made under Section 63 is liable on summary conviction to pay a fine based on the standard scale. I could not find a definition of "summary conviction" of "fine" or "standard scale". In the absence of a definition set out in the act itself, you revert to the Interpretation Act 1978 (Section 5):

"In any Act, unless the contrary intention appears, words and expressions listed in Schedule 1 to this Act are to be construed according to that Schedule."

The IA has a definition of "standard scale":

"The standard scale", with reference to a fine or penalty for an offence triable only summarily -
(a) in relation to England and Wales, has the meaning given by section 37 of the Criminal Justice Act 1982"

Based on the above, the fact that the airport operator has split out the parking provisions to make it look like they (or their agents) can pursue a civil claim, that's contrary to Section 64, which confirms that a person is liable to a fine if convicted; you can't be convicted in a civil court because those courts are intended to resolve disputes, not punish someone for committing an offence.

For the airport operator to bring a claim in the civil courts, it would have had to have been given the power to do so under the enabling act, otherwise they will be acting beyond their powers (ultra vires). There is a well established legal principal under the maxim delegatus non potestas delegare which roughly translates to, a person who has been delegated certain powers cannot further delegate those powers given it.

Classic case law example is Barnard v National Dock Labour Board. The board were given powers to discipline workers under relevant statutory laws. They lawfully delegated that power to the local regional boards but one board then sub-delegated that power to a port manage. The Court of Appeal held that the local board acted beyond their powers, because there was no statutory power that gave them the right to sub-delegate that power to the port manager.

Same principle applies to airport operators - just because it's in the byelaws doesn't make it lawful.

[Lambie7]

Phew. Thanks Rob, that is a full response. It will take time to digest !