I remember this case. Sorry to spoil your fun.
Esinem's post above includes:
Mr. Wolman (The Appellant) alleges that: “The defendants have no right to issue a PCN [penalty charge notice] against a motorcycle that has been lifted onto, and is resting in a stable position on, its stand such that neither of its two wheels is in contact with the footway or urban road.”
and
"I would therefore allow the appeal to the extent of setting aside the declaration made by the judge and substituting for it a declaration that by parking his motorcycle on its stand on the pavement with its body and one or both of its wheels on or over the pavement
the claimant was in contravention of section 15 of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 as amended by section 15(2) of the London Local Authorities Act 2000".
-------------
"Although the (Court of Appeal) judges allowed the appeal because Deputy Circuit Judge Robin Laurie’s declaration on the law against parking was too wide, they
substituted a declaration that by parking the motorcycle on its stand on the pavement with its body and one or both wheels on or over the pavement,
Mr Wolman was in contravention of the parking laws".Link: London Times Online.
http://www.goldschmidt.co.za/27/barrister-loses-motorcycle-parking-challenge/"He now stands to pay for up to 100 parking tickets plus legal costs".
But Lord Justice Moore-Bick, giving the ruling of the Court of Appeal, said: "When parked in Chancery Lane in the manner I have described, his motorcycle can quite properly be said to be parked on the pavement, even if neither wheel is directly in contact with it."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6924105.stmOwn up. Who has changed my Avitar to one showing a Father Christmas CEO proudly standing next to a $scar?