Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 12:07 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2005 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
Here's another relvent case you might find hard to come by.

Regards

JD

R (on the application of Heath) v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council


ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
MAURICE KAY J
16 October 2000
[2000] All ER (D) 1414

Local authority – Contract – Contract for hackney carriage driver for the transportation of pupil to a special needs school – Authority writing to driver stating that in order to renew the contract he would have to obtain a private hire vehicles operator’s licence – Whether authority misconstruing law – Town Police Clauses Act 1847, s 37 – Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, s 80.

The applicant, H, was the licensed driver of a hackney carriage (cab). He was awarded a contract by the defendant authority to transport a pupil to a special needs school until April 2001. In December 1999, the authority wrote to H stating , inter alia, that as from April 2001, those persons tendering for contracts would be required to hold a private hire vehicle operators licence. H’s cab was licensed pursuant to s 37 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847.

H sought judicial review of the authority’s decision. He contended, inter alia, that the licensing provisions in relation to private hire vehicles, under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 was a completely distinct scheme which did not apply to licensed cab drivers. He submitted that the authority’s misapplication of the law meant that the conditions set out in their letter of December 1999 were illegal.
The court ruled:

The authority had misconstrued the law in relation to the regulation of hackney cabs and private hire vehicles, since s 80 of the 1976 Act provided that a private hire vehicle could be a motor vehicle ‘other than a hackney carriage’. It followed that the conditions set out in their letter of December 1999 had been misconceived. Therefore it would be unlawful for the council, when awarding new contracts, to use the approach that they had.


Clive Lewis (instructed by Nelsons, Nottingham) for the applicant.
Carol McMillen (instructed by Paul Evans) for the authority.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2005 8:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 53921
Location: 1066 Country
That's the one I had, and lost.

The bit that's not in this record, of the judgement, is the bit where the judge says that a council can have a bylaw (or they can apply for a bylaw) saying that cab drivers need an ops license.

Whether the Sec of State would allow that is another matter. :wink:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group