A clear ahead-only arrow did not need a second no-right-turn sign (2026)

Case 2250435312 / 2025-12-31 / Adjudicator Teresa Brennan

CAMDEN ROAD EASTBOUND JW CAMDEN STREET NW1

“There is no requirement for an additional no right turn sign.”

Teresa Brennan

The PCN concerned an eastbound journey on Camden Road at its junction with Camden Street. The driver described an unfamiliar, crowded area and bright sunshine, and argued that the blue straight-ahead sign was too high and there was no no-right-turn sign.

Transport for London's CCTV showed the vehicle turning right. The site photographs showed the blue arrow below the lowest traffic-signal lamp and a green ahead arrow when the lights changed. Teresa Brennan found the signing clear, not too high and not obscured by sign clutter. The appeal was refused on 31 December 2025.

The adjudicator considered that a driver able to see the traffic lights would also be able to see the blue sign. An additional no-right-turn sign was not required. The ahead-only instruction itself prohibited the recorded right turn.

This case explains why a missing red prohibited-turn sign is not, by itself, a ground for cancelling a Code 32 PCN. A visibility challenge needs evidence about the actual approach and sign placement. That is the distinction from the allowed approach case in this guide, where the arrows faced a different traffic stream.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 2250435312 in the London Tribunals register to find the official decision. This commentary distinguishes the adjudicator's finding from a possible argument in a different case; previous tribunal decisions do not bind another adjudicator.