Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Robert Markovic & Anor v Leicester City Council

[2023] UKFTT 516 (GRC)
Two people got fined for leaving their bin on the street after garbage day. They said they didn't know the rules because others did it too, and they didn't understand the notice (one has bad eyesight and they don't speak English well). The judge believed them and canceled the fines.

Key Facts

  • Appellants appealed against fixed penalty notices (£80 each) for leaving their bin on the public footpath after collection day.
  • Appellants claimed they were unaware of the specific requirement to remove the bin promptly after collection, observing other residents doing so.
  • Appellants cited the first appellant's cataract and poor English skills, and the second appellant's limited English skills, as reasons for non-compliance.
  • A multi-lingual leaflet was sent to the street, but not in Slovakian, the appellants' first language.
  • Since becoming aware of the requirement, the appellants complied.

Legal Principles

A waste collection authority can serve a notice requiring an occupier to place waste for collection in specified receptacles and may impose requirements as to the placing of receptacles.

Environmental Protection Act 1990, Section 46

If a person fails to comply with a Section 46 notice without reasonable excuse, causing or likely causing a nuisance, a fixed penalty can be imposed after a written warning and notice of intent.

Environmental Protection Act 1990, Section 46A

Before issuing a fixed penalty, a notice of intent must be served, outlining grounds, amount, and right to make representations. A final notice follows after 28 days.

Environmental Protection Act 1990, Section 46C

Appeals against fixed penalties can be made to the First-tier Tribunal, which may withdraw or confirm the requirement to pay.

Environmental Protection Act 1990, Section 46D

Outcomes

Appeals allowed.

The Tribunal accepted the appellants' combined reasons (lack of awareness due to observing other residents' practices, coupled with limited English skills and the first appellant's visual impairment) constituted a reasonable excuse for non-compliance.

Fixed penalty requirement withdrawn.

The appellants' reasonable excuse and subsequent compliance with the requirements outweighed the initial non-compliance.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.