Contesting a speed camera fine in Belgium: when do you really stand a chance?

Contesting a speed camera fine is possible, but if all you write is that you “certainly weren’t driving that fast”, you have little chance. The law gives the findings of an approved speed camera special evidential weight. So you need concrete evidence.

Yet it regularly happens that something is wrong: a police report (procès-verbal) sent too late, a photo on which it is not clear which vehicle was measured, a police report drawn up in the wrong language. In this article, you will find out which arguments work. It is part of our overview of speeding.

How much evidential weight does a speed camera photo have?

Article 62 of the Road Traffic Act provides that findings made by means of an automatically operating device, whether or not an officer is present, are taken as true unless proven otherwise. It is therefore up to you to show that the measurement is wrong.

On 25 November 2025, the Court of Cassation confirmed, for a speed camera operated by an officer, that the public prosecutor (parquet) does not have to produce particular images or documents for this. Only solid evidence to the contrary can overturn the finding. Raising a doubt is not enough.

The police court (tribunal de police) of Namur (Dinant division) took the same line on 12 December 2024: anyone asking for further checks on how the speed camera worked or on the officers’ training must first provide concrete initial evidence that something went wrong.

The measuring device: approval and verification

Every device used by the police must comply with the Royal Decree of 12 October 2010 on the approval, verification and installation of measuring devices used in road traffic. This means that:

• the model must be approved;
• the device must be verified and have a valid verification certificate;
• it must be installed and used in accordance with the user manual;
• the officer using it must have completed the prescribed training.

The police report normally states the type of device, the serial number and the date of verification. If those details are missing, or if the verification had expired on the day of the measurement, that is a serious argument.

Cone and ellipse on the photo

A speed camera photo includes guide lines showing which vehicle was measured: a cone and an ellipse. In the Dinant judgment, the judge held that both lines must touch the vehicle, but that they do not have to coincide perfectly. There was only one vehicle in the photo, so the measurement was upheld.

If there are two vehicles in the measuring zone, on the other hand, that is a concrete argument.

Speed camera with an officer: who drew up the police report?

With a mobile speed camera, an officer operates the device. Often, a colleague later draws up the police report at the police station. According to the Court of Cassation (24 March 2026), this is allowed. The findings keep their special evidential weight, provided the police report clearly states who was operating the device, which device it was and that it had been correctly installed. If you credibly challenge that last point, the judge must examine it.

What counts as initial evidence?

Initial evidence is a concrete element that casts serious doubt on the finding, for example:

• a photo or video of the location showing that the 30 zone sign was not there or was not visible;
• data from a journey recorder, a tachograph or an app showing a different speed or a different time;
• proof that you were somewhere else at the time, or that someone else was driving the car;
• a photo showing two vehicles in the measuring zone.

Your own measurement of an average speed check with Google Maps is not enough, the police court of Vilvoorde held on 6 November 2025. See also our article on average speed cameras and municipal administrative fines.

The police report arrived too late

The copy of the police report must be sent on time. For offences committed since 1 July 2026, the authorities have 30 days, starting from the moment they know who the offender, the owner or the regular driver is. For older offences, the period was 14 days, starting from the finding. For a fixed speed camera, that is the day of the measurement, not the day an officer later processed the images.

Late sending does not make the police report void. It does, however, lose its special evidential weight and only counts as mere information. The judge must then assess for themselves whether the offence is proven, using the other elements in the file.

• The police court of Walloon Brabant (Wavre division) acquitted, on 4 September 2020, a driver flashed at 173 km/h (measured speed) on the motorway. The police report had been sent two days too late and there was no other evidence.
• The police court of Namur (Namur division) did the same on 27 January 2026: the copy had been sent well after the deadline, and the file contained no interview, no reply form and no photo.

If there are other elements, such as a clear photo or your own statement, the judge may still consider the offence established. See also our article on errors in the police report.

A police report in the wrong language

The police report must be drawn up in the correct language. Otherwise, it is void. In Brussels, the language depends on your statements and, if there are none, on objective elements such as your domicile.

On 24 September 2025, the Dutch-speaking police court of Brussels ruled on a speeding offence committed in Schaerbeek. The police report had been drawn up in Dutch, although the driver lived in Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve and nothing in the file pointed to Dutch. The judge declared the police report void and the prosecution inadmissible.

A “yes” on the reply form is not a confession

The letter about your offence usually contains a reply form asking whether you admit the offence. In the Wavre judgment of 4 September 2020, the judge held that a mere “yes”, without any explanation, is not enough to prove the offence. Nobody can, moreover, be forced to cooperate in their own conviction.

Still, be careful. In the Dinant judgment, the admission on the reply form did carry weight, together with a confession at the hearing.

Ask for the file before deciding: the photo, the device data and the verification certificate. Only then will you know whether a defence makes sense.

Weren’t you driving yourself? That is a different defence. See our article on identifying the driver. Have you already received a payment order (ordre de paiement)? Then read our article on appealing against a payment order.

Frequently asked questions

Have your case reviewed

Do you want to contest a speed camera fine? We request the file, check the measurement, the verification, the deadlines and the language, and tell you honestly whether a defence makes sense. Contact us.

Law as at 30 September 2026. We update this article when the rules change.