Cambridge Super-Case

arabesque_101

Thanks again bazster.

What you have said is very helpful and I now understand why it is called a super case or test case. But I don't understand kirkbyinfurnesslad's statement on page one of this thread when kirkbyinfurnesslad said "unlike all the other cases this is one case that could and most likely will, end up in the Court of Appeal". Now I understand that if it gets appealed, there is a good chance it gets forced to the Court of Appeal if the circuit judge gets his say, but are either party likely to appeal? Has either party indicated they are likely to appeal if they lose? Has Parking Eye appealed before?

arabesque_101

OK I think I've worked it out. If Parking Eye lose the super case, and, depending on the wording in the judgement, if it looks like it could become a defacto precedent with other district judges following the decision of their superior judge, and if Parking Eye think therefore their business might be in danger of losing all future cases in the district court, then Parking Eye will presumably have to appeal to have any hope of being able to threaten future drivers/keepers with court.

Coupon-mad

PE would pretty much 'have' to appeal if they lose - and the defendants would likely appeal too if it went the other way.

Stroma

It's still not binding on either party whatever the decision. But if it's appealed its a court of record so will be I think.

Umkomaas

Coupon-mad wrote: »

PE would pretty much 'have' to appeal if they lose - and the defendants would likely appeal too if it went the other way.

I think PE would have to, as not only would it push them closer to the abyss, it would drag the whole 'industry' with them.

I bet there are a few worried PPCs out there at the moment, which could very quickly turn to vengeance as PE's rapacious strategy of aggressively pursuing thousands of motorists to court could just so spectacularly blow up in the faces of their AOS buddies, if Cambridge goes t!ts up for them all.

MothballsWallet

bod1467 wrote: »

"Когда деньги решают правда молчит"

https://translate.google.co.uk/#auto/ru/When%20money%20talks%20the%20truth%20is%20silent

I'll have to ask Mrs MbW about how accurate that is

Parking-Prankster

I'm not sure PE will appeal.




They went in on narrow grounds. They paid £1000 a week and were therefore renting from the landowner. They were the principal, although they are saying in all other cases, even ones filed this week that they are agents. They shied away from any explanation of their costs.


They can therefore start again, with only a small number of theor car parks ruled out.


Of course, if HHJ Moloney has to do another 'test case' for a slightly difference scenario, he might not be best pleased.


If PE win, then I have no idea if the defendants will appeal, but the cost of transcripts etc will be substantial. Similarly, the judgment will only apply to a few of PEs car parks, and therefore there may still be unanswered questions. We will have to wait and see.


The judgment was promised in 4 weeks, which is up on Tuesday, so not long to wait now (unless it is late)

Umkomaas

The judgment was promised in 4 weeks, which is up on Tuesday, so not long to wait now (unless it is late)

In which PE might slip him a PCN

salmosalaris

It rather depends what HHJ Moloney finds. A judgment that £85 is a penalty would rather screw them up on all car parks where their PCN is £85 and even more so on £100 car parks IMHO . They surely would have to appeal this .

waamo

The cynic in me says that the judgement will be a fudge that leaves everybody in the same position as before.