1. A binding contract or penalty term remains unproved
A contractual penalty requires a contract and a penalty agreement incorporated into it. The person parking must have had an opportunity to read the terms; unexpected or incomprehensible standard terms may not become part of the contract. Law of Obligations Act, § 9(1), § 37(1), (3) and § 158(1).
Tartu Circuit Court, 31 March 2025 — 2-23-129926, paragraphs 8–13. The operator claimed a €20 contractual penalty and €20 in collection costs. The parking terms in force at the time of the breach could not be established from the photographs submitted. Later photographs showed changed terms, including a free parking period.
The court dismissed the entire claim and ordered the operator to pay €820 in procedural costs. The important conclusion is that a later or unreadable photograph of a sign does not automatically prove which terms applied on the day of parking.
2. The breach or the correct debtor remains unproved
The operator generally has to prove the facts on which the claim is based. It is important to distinguish the assertion “there was no parking disc” from “parking was not registered by any permitted method”. Code of Civil Procedure, § 230(1).
Tallinn Circuit Court, 20 December 2024 — 2-24-117333, paragraphs 9.2–10. The operator claimed a €20 contractual penalty and €20 in collection costs, plus late-payment interest. There was no parking disc in the car, but the start of parking could also be registered at a terminal. The vehicle registration numbers in the submitted terminal log had been redacted.
The court dismissed the action and ordered the operator to pay €100 in procedural costs. A photograph of a car without a parking disc did not prove a breach, because the operator had not proved that parking had also not been registered electronically.
3. The claim or notification of it comes too late
There are two separate grounds here:
- Limitation: a contractual penalty claim generally becomes time-barred after three years; the court applies limitation at the debtor's request. General Part of the Civil Code Act, § 143, § 146(1) and § 147(1).
- Late notification: the operator loses the right to claim a contractual penalty if it does not give notice within a reasonable time after discovering the breach. This can happen even before the limitation period expires. Law of Obligations Act, § 159(2).
Tartu Circuit Court, 7 March 2022 — 2-19-135957, paragraphs 14–16. The operator claimed a total of €80 in contractual penalties and €30 in collection costs for two parking occasions. The photographs did not show penalty notices being left under the windscreen wipers, and there was no other evidence of immediate notification.
The court dismissed the €110 claim because notification within a reasonable time had not been proved. The operator was ordered to pay €1,035 in procedural costs excluding VAT. Photographing the car and the breach does not in itself prove notification of the penalty claim.
Tehiskohtunik
