The Supreme Court in ParkingEye Ltd v. Beavis, joined to a revision of the common law on penalties in Cavendish Square BV v. Makdessi, declined to hold that an £85 charge for overstaying in a car park was unfair under European Union consumer protection law. This note asks, when will the UK’s highest court say contract terms are unfair against consumers? How does the Court perceive its role in furthering a charter of economic, social and consumer rights? Has the majority of the Court, in light of Lord Toulson’s powerful dissent, accurately interpreted the EU Court of Justice’s guidance and the purpose of the Directive? And finally, given the Court of Justice’s requirements for making a preliminary reference, and the fact that EU law directly binds every national court, can we regard ParkingEye as a precedent at all?