South Australian woman wins $50k battle with council after exposing double parking law

Lauren Thomson
7NEWS
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has launched a Black Friday sales blitz to crack down on misleading discount tactics and deceptive advertising by retailers. The watchdog is monitoring online and in-store promotions for misleading f

A South Australian mother has won a four-year legal battle against an Adelaide council after challenging a $104 parking fine.

Only known as “Ms Mathie” in court documents, the mother was fined in 2021 for “double parking” outside Blakes Crossing Christian school in Blakeview, a private school in Adelaide’s north.

Court documents said Mathie’s car was photographed twice in two minutes by a Playford Council inspector, stopped in a line of traffic but parallel to a car parked on the street.

Sign up to The Nightly's newsletters.

Get the first look at the digital newspaper, curated daily stories and breaking headlines delivered to your inbox.

Email Us
By continuing you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy.

Magistrate Edward Stratton-Smith originally upheld the fine, ruling there was enough room for Mathie to drive around the traffic, even if that meant crossing onto the wrong side of the road.

Mathie appealed, and the Supreme Court set aside the conviction, finding the ticket was not clearly labelled and failed to specify the offence.

Playford Council then appealed against the judgment in the Court of Appeal, the state’s highest court.

The Adelaide woman spent over $50k to fight a $107 fine.
The Adelaide woman spent over $50k to fight a $107 fine. Credit: Supplied/Google Maps.

The panel of justices found the parking ticket had been labelled sufficiently, containing the phrase “double parking”, wording the court argued was common knowledge to road users.

The current laws define what double parking means.

“A driver must not stop on a road if to do so would put any part of the vehicle that the driver is driving between a vehicle that is parked on the road and the centre of the road,” they read.

But the court also ruled Mathie’s appeal was valid for a for a basic reason — that she was a unrepresented applicant at trial in the beginning and the the burden of proof had not been explained to her.

The court also found it would have been dangerous for her to overtake the school traffic.

The council later withdrew the charges instead of proceeding to a retrial.

The Court of Appeal last month ordered the Playford Council to pay $10,580 to Mathie however this barely made a dent in the $57,296 legal costs she was seeking.

The court said the decision and ruling on costs was down to “neither party achieving total success”.

Fighting the $107 fine cost Mathie $46,716.

Her lawyer, Karen Stanley from Stanley Hill Elkins said most drivers should think twice before fighting a fine.

“My advice is to pay the fine unless you have deep pockets,” she told 7NEWS.com.au.

“Legal representation for a parking fine is likely 50 times the cost of the fine. If you lose, council can seek costs of between $4,000 to $5,000.”

Stanley explained the offence of double parking was broader than many realise.

“Strictly speaking, if you are in a line of traffic at a red light and there is a parked car to the left of your car and the centre of the road on the other side, you are double parked,” she said.

She said Mathie had nowhere to go without crossing onto the wrong side of the road, and photos showed a child crossing in front of her car at the time — highlighting the safety risks.

“Mathie didn’t just turn off her car and get out, she was in a line of traffic with nowhere to go without crossing onto the wrong side of the road,” she said.

“The Council inspector who photographed her car was in fact driving in in the opposite direction, ironically proving that it wasn’t safe for her to overtake the vehicles in front.”

A City of Playford spokesperson told the ABC the council pursued the case to “preserve the integrity of the expiation process, which is an essential regulatory function relied on by councils as well as the South Australia Police”.

“Mathie so strongly believed that what happened to her was unfair that she was willing to fight the charge,” Stanley said.

“She said to me ‘be the change’. And indeed she has been the change. This case is a huge win for the little guy against a powerful and well-funded prosecution authority.

“Representing Mathie while she was taken on a wild ride through the justice system has been one of the great honours of my career.”

Originally published on 7NEWS

Latest Edition

The Nightly cover for 14-11-2025

Latest Edition

Edition Edition 14 November 202514 November 2025

How Netflix is dumbing down storylines to keep distracted viewers from losing the plot.