Thousands of prosecutions for alleged fare evasion brought by train companies are set to be declared void after a judge’s ruling.
Four train companies including Northern Rail and Greater Anglia brought prosecutions against thousands of passengers using the controversial single justice procedure (SJP), despite not being permitted to do so.
At a hearing in June, Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring told Westminster Magistrates’ Court he believed the prosecutions were “void” and “probably unlawful”, with lawyers for rail companies telling a further hearing last month they were “in agreement” the cases should be quashed.
In a ruling at the same court on Thursday, Judge Goldspring said six “test cases” should be declared a “nullity”, so it was “as if as though the proceedings never existed”.
“They should never have been brought through that process. This is, to my mind, a paradigm nullity.”
He continued: “I’m satisfied that the correct approach is to declare each of the prosecutions void and a nullity.”
The exact number of those affected is currently unknown, with a previous hearing told around 75,000 people could have been prosecuted for fare evasion offences under the SJP.
Judge Goldspring said “the number seems to change every time I ask”, but a figure of “over 74,000” is a “best guess at the moment”.
Thursday’s ruling only affects the six “test cases”, with the judge putting in motion plans for the thousands of other prosecutions to be declared void in the same way.
Following his ruling, he said attempts would be made by HM Courts and Tribunals Service, the Department for Transport and the train operating companies to identify those affected in the coming weeks.
He said a list of those affected would aim to be compiled by the end of September, with the cases listed as a “bulk” hearing “by the end of October”.
He said: “I will simply list them as a bulk listing, no parties required, and then I will then make a similar direction in relation to all these cases affected, so everybody is in the same position.”
“There are discussions ongoing with all the parties about how that may be paid,” he added.
It is understood those affected will be contacted directly and given further instructions.
After the hearing, a spokesperson for Northern Rail said: “We welcome the judgment of the Chief Magistrate in court today. We would like to apologise again for the errors that have occurred.
“We will now work with the court to implement today’s findings. We are unable to respond to individual inquiries in the meantime.
“Northern remains committed to ensuring that all our customers are treated fairly, which means ensuring all passengers who board our trains have a valid ticket.”
A Government spokesperson said: “We acknowledge the Chief Magistrate’s judgment and welcome the apology from train operators. While fare evasion should be tackled, the right process should be followed at all times.
“The people affected will be directly contacted in due course to resolve the cases in accordance with the judgment.”
The SJP was set up in 2015 to allow magistrates to decide on minor offences, such as using a television without a licence or driving without car insurance, without defendants going to court.
But the Magistrates’ Association has previously said “there are concerns” that cases are being brought before magistrates without prosecutors, such as the DVLA or TV Licensing, reading mitigations, and that many of its members are “uncomfortable” with the system.
The same month, then Justice Secretary Alex Chalk told Parliament that although he believed the SJP “works well”, there were issues surrounding transparency which needed “recalibrating”.
Last year, 787,403 criminal cases were dealt with by magistrates’ courts under the SJP.
Rail companies were permitted to use the SJP in 2016 to prosecute privately fare evaders, but the Evening Standard reported several of these cases were brought under the Regulation of Railways Act 1889, which is not allowed under the procedure.
At the hearing in July, Brian O’Neill KC, representing Northern Rail, said both his company and Greater Anglia “recognise there was no power” to pursue such prosecutions.
He said: “We are all in agreement that the proceedings which were brought by the single justice procedure were a nullity.”
In written submissions for the earlier hearing, Greater Anglia said it acknowledged “a series of significant errors” had occurred and wanted to “apologise unreservedly” to those affected.
