Parliament Workbench
Data: Motions & questions to 19 Nov 2026

Written Question · S5W-10526 · Session 5

What consideration it has given to the impact of the judgments in ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 and Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Mac…

Answered Asked by Jackson Carlaw Con Lodged 30 Jul 2017

The question

To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to the impact of the judgments in ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 and Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Mackie [2017] SC DUN 24 on the (a) contractual enforcement and (b) standing of private parking schemes.

The answer

Answered by Humza Yousaf on 23 Aug 2017 · 24 days after it was lodged, on time

We are aware that improvements could be made to various aspects of the private parking schemes, and for this reason, we have set up a Stakeholder Working Group with representatives from the private parking industry, Trading Standards Scotland and Citizens Advice Scotland to explore how we can deliver improvements to the practices of private parking operators in Scotland.
As part of this work, we have been exploring how we can deliver a fairer, more transparent and consistent approach to parking enforcement practices and to the appeals process in Scotland through the development of a single Code of Practice that the industry would voluntarily sign up to. In addition, a Private Member's Bill entitled Parking (Code of Practice) Bill was introduced in the UK Parliament on 19 July 2017.
The Private Member's Bill also seeks to create a fairer and more transparent sector through regulation via the development of a single Code of Practice. We are therefore exploring this issue with our UK counterparts to determine what this would mean for Scotland. We will continue to work with our stakeholders to ensure that we have a fair and transparent sector, in which motorists understand their rights and responsibilities for parking on private land.

In the Official Report

No contribution in the Official Report cites S5W-10526 by reference.