Town Quay IS relevant land, Soton Judge decides

BenefitMaster

Hi Folks

Lay-repping yesterday, on a Town Quay case.

Without going through all the details, the Judge decided that the byelaws do no deal with Parking, and as a result, Town Quay is relevant land. This is, of course,a reversal of every single POPLA decision about this site to date, and I have asked the Defendant if they wish to appeal on a point of law.

More news as it comes.

hoohoo

I think this is specific to Town Quay, and the particular wording of their byelaws:

The byelaws state

Town Quay is subject to statutory control in the form of bylaws; byelaw 39 states:
“A person having charge of a vehicle in the dock estate shall at all times comply with any directions of ABP with respect to the loading, discharging, manoeuvring and removal thereof and shall not, without the permission of the ABP:-
a) Leave the vehicle unattended anywhere within the dock estate; or,
b) Take it into any shed or working area”.

The judge has ruled that condition (a) is not referring to parking.

Other byelaws with different wording will still mean that the 'relevant land' argument holds in those situations.

For instance, Liverpool airport byelaw 19 forbids 'parking a vehicle elsewhere than in a place provided for that purpose' and so this airport will not be subject to POFA 2012 keeper liability.

TDA

hoohoo wrote: »

I think this is specific to Town Quay, and the particular wording of their byelaws:

The byelaws state

Town Quay is subject to statutory control in the form of bylaws; byelaw 39 states:
“A person having charge of a vehicle in the dock estate shall at all times comply with any directions of ABP with respect to the loading, discharging, manoeuvring and removal thereof and shall not, without the permission of the ABP:-
a) Leave the vehicle unattended anywhere within the dock estate; or,
b) Take it into any shed or working area”.

The judge has ruled that condition (a) is not referring to parking.

Other byelaws with different wording will still mean that the 'relevant land' argument holds in those situations.

For instance, Liverpool airport byelaw 19 forbids 'parking a vehicle elsewhere than in a place provided for that purpose' and so this airport will not be subject to POFA 2012 keeper liability.

Leaving the vehicle unattended would appear to me to be the very definition of 'parking'.

Will be interested to hear more details on the judges reasoning if this is forthcoming from BenefitMaster.

BenefitMaster

TDA wrote: »

Leaving the vehicle unattended would appear to me to be the very definition of 'parking'.

Will be interested to hear more details on the judges reasoning if this is forthcoming from BenefitMaster.

Broadly, the byelaw refers to safety and management of the vehicle, not control of parking. I disagree, and I will be considering taking this one to court myself, but that's the way it lies at the moment.

It doesn't help that DVLA, BPA, PE and ABP have conspired to say "we won't enforce the byelaw" - so making a mockery of the concept of "Rule of Law"

Guys_Dad

We do get some "interesting" decisions from judges, don't we.

But are we surprised?

Just read the recent league table of best paid jobs in the UK here http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2868911/Best-paid-UK-jobs-2014-Compare-pay-national-average.html

You may care to note that solicitors are at number 30 - two below train and tram drivers - whilst barristers and judges are at 39.

TDA

BenefitMaster wrote: »

Broadly, the byelaw refers to safety and management of the vehicle, not control of parking. I disagree, and I will be considering taking this one to court myself, but that's the way it lies at the moment.

It doesn't help that DVLA, BPA, PE and ABP have conspired to say "we won't enforce the byelaw" - so making a mockery of the concept of "Rule of Law"

So the judge is ruling on how (a) is framed within the byelaws. Interesting. May have a perusal of the byelaws myself if I get the chance. Have you got a link?

Guys Dad, the barrister and solicitor figures, at least, will be largely skewed by those that practice criminal law. I don't know how Judges pay-scales work. Is it based on the court they sit in?

bargepole

Guys_Dad wrote: »

We do get some "interesting" decisions from judges, don't we.

But are we surprised?

Just read the recent league table of best paid jobs in the UK here http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2868911/Best-paid-UK-jobs-2014-Compare-pay-national-average.html

You may care to note that solicitors are at number 30 - two below train and tram drivers - whilst barristers and judges are at 39.

Those figures in the Daily Fail are well out.


According to the MoJ website, the salary for a District Judge in 2013 was £103,950 and it probably went up a bit in Apr 2014.

The_Deep

Chartered Accountants, £38,000, poor sods, less than a Police Sergeant, or is the table fubar?

HO87

Typical Daily Fail. Since when has there been 237,000 police officers in the UK of sergeant or constable ranks? There were only 129,000 of all ranks in 2013 (latest Government figures) with a further 17,500 in Scotland and another 7,200 in the PSNI. Even my crude O-Level Maths tells me that the total is way below the Fail's figures.

The real figures - at constable and sergeant rank - in just England and Wales is only 117,000 so the Fail's total of 237,000 is way out of whack.

The chartered accountants I know - and there are several - wouldn't get out of bed for £38K.

These figures are almost certainly rough averages based on figures the Mail would seem to have stuck a wet finger in the air for. That's never been known before.

longtimedead

Just wondering if Benefitmaster has any further news on the current status at Town Quay regards 'Relevant Land'.

Have read both your and Bikerpaul's submissions with interest but is it currently worth appealing an NTK on this issue?

Thanks in advance for any updates

enfield_freddy

yes its worth appealing , to popla or the kangaroo club if necessary , this case is just one judges interpretation of the law , other judges (if it ever gets that far) might think differently