header-logo header-logo

01 August 2013
Issue: 7571 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Local authority

R (on the application of Attfield) v London Borough of Barnet [2013] EWHC 2089 (Admin), [2013] All ER (D) 248 (Jul)

The defendant local authority decided to increase the charges for residents' parking permits and visitors vouchers in controlled parking zones in the borough pursuant to s 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 under which an authority had power to designate parking places on the highway, to charge for use of them and to issue parking permits for charge. The claimant, a resident of the borough, challenged the decision by way of judicial review, contending that the increase in charges was unlawful because its purpose was to generate a surplus, beyond the money needed to operate the parking scheme, to fund other transport expenditure, such as road repair and concessionary fares. The court ruled that the 1984 Act was not a taxing statute although the permit charges generated revenue for the local authority. A public body had to exercise a statutory power for the purpose for which the power had been conferred by Parliament, and

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll