The article considers two County Court decisions which demonstrate novel approaches regarding the issues of judicial discretion and the burden of proof in appeals against civil penalties.

It sets out the decision in Hair EQ Limited v Secretary of State for the Home Department which suggests that judges may consider factors outside of the Code of Practice to cancel or substantially reduce the penalty amount in CPN appeals.

The Judge in Hair EQ indicated that, if the penalty was not being cancelled, it would have been reduced from £45,000 to just £5,000.

The article also considers a case which held that the Respondent bears the initial burden to show that an individual was employed and not permitted to work.

Read more here: https://freemovement.org.uk/civil-penalty-appeals-judicial-discretion/