Remembering the former 17-ton limit did not defeat clear signs (2026)

Case 2250250292 / 2025-09-18 / Adjudicator Mackenzie Robinson

ROTHERHITHE TUNNEL APPROACH / BRUNEL ROAD

“Alternative routes are available as advised by the signage and arrows on the road surface.”

Mackenzie Robinson

The appellant company said it had been unaware of the changed weight restriction and believed the former 17-ton limit remained in place. Mackenzie Robinson framed the issue differently: the question was whether the change introduced by the 2018 traffic order had been adequately communicated, allowing motorists to choose another route.

The authority supplied detailed maps and photographs showing advance warning signs, directional road arrows and signs near the tunnel entrance. Robinson found that these identified the two-tonne restriction and directed drivers towards alternatives. He assessed the signage together rather than treating the company's previous understanding as decisive.

The appeal was refused. Drivers might have missed or misunderstood the signs, but the adjudicator found that the information was available and adequate. The case distinguishes familiarity with an older rule from evidence about the signs encountered on the relevant journey; past knowledge did not establish a defect in the changed restriction's communication.

Source and case reference

Use case reference 2250250292 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.