Single Justice Procedure Notice for Fare Evasion

A Single Justice Procedure Notice (SJPN) is a court document used for certain minor criminal offences. It allows a single magistrate to deal with a case without a full hearing, provided the defendant does not request one. The SJPN will set out the alleged offence, ask whether you plead guilty or not guilty, and give a deadline — usually 21 days — for your response.

If you plead guilty by post, a single magistrate can convict and sentence you without you appearing in court. If you plead not guilty or do not respond, the court will list the matter for a hearing.

Critically, if you do not respond at all, the magistrate may deal with the case in your absence and enter a conviction. This is how many people have received convictions without being aware of the proceedings — particularly where the SJPN was sent to an old address or where personal details given at the time of the alleged offence were incorrect.

In August 2024, the Chief Magistrate ruled that a number of rail operators had unlawfully used the Single Justice Procedure to prosecute fare evasion offences under section 5(3) of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889. The ruling found that section 5 offences require a hearing before a full court and cannot lawfully be dealt with by the Single Justice Procedure. As a result, around 75,000 convictions were quashed.

The operators affected included Northern, TransPennine Express, Avanti West Coast, Greater Anglia, Great Western Railway, and Merseyrail. If you were convicted between 2018 and 2023 under the SJP by one of these operators for a section 5 offence, your conviction may have been quashed. David advises on whether any individual conviction falls within the scope of the ruling.

Do not ignore an SJPN. Failure to respond before the deadline can result in a conviction in your absence. Before responding, take legal advice — the way you respond can significantly affect the outcome.

Options when responding to an SJPN include: pleading not guilty and requesting a hearing; pleading guilty with written mitigation; or making representations to the prosecution seeking withdrawal before any response is filed. David advises on the most appropriate approach in each case before any response is submitted to the court.