Taxi Driver Online

YIPPEEEEEEE
as of 17/10/05

more info to follow
all i will say is that not all sherrif's agree with the councils extensions
lets go higher

Have a wee look seems like sheriff Liddle agrees with us, nae luck RCF/RCFF.



Can someone find Sheriff Liddle's decision. This is obviously the C.E.C appeal, I didn't have the time to look it up and post it on here.


Makes for interesting reading considering Mr Salteri didn't even appear in court to oppose the application.

FORM Al

SHERIFFDOM OF LOTHIAN
AND BORDERS AT EDINBURGH
Court Ref No. B442/05

under Section 3(2) of the
Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982
in the Summary Application by

THE CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL, City Chambers, High Street, Edinburgh, as licensing authority in terms of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982

APPLICANT against

DAWN SALTERI Address Deleted

RESPONDENT

------------------------
The Applicant appeals to the Sheriff Principal on the following grounds: GROUNDS OF APPEAL







Reference is made to the Judgement issued by the learned Sheriff Liddle on 17 October 2005, following upon the First Calling. At the First Calling the Sheriff stated that "there are hundreds of other cases like these before the Court" and it was not good enough for the Applicant to simply appear and `ex parte' move for an extension of the time limit and further that eleven months was too long for the Respondent to wait for a decision. The Sheriff accordingly dismissed the application.

2
The Applicant respectfully submits that the Sheriff was in error in dismissing the
V
I7 application. It is submitted that decree as craved should have been granted. In particular:

1. The Sheriff was required to have regard to the reasons advanced by the Applicant for extending the period for determination of the application. The Applicant set out the reasons for instructing a new survey of demand on 22 March 2005 at Articles 4, 5 and 6 of Condescendence. The Applicant set out the reason for seeking an extension of the time period at Articles 7, 8 and 9 of Condescendence. In exercising his discretion in terms of Section 3(2) of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 the Sheriff must have regard to the reason advanced by the Applicant. In not having regard to the reason the Sheriff acted wholly unreasonably.

2. Further, and in any event, the Sheriff misdirected himself in stating that the Applicant was simply appearing and `ex parte' moving for an extension of the time limit. The Sheriff failed to have had regard to the following factors (a) the Initial Writ craved an extension and (b) the Respondent did not appear to oppose the extension. No Sheriff properly directing himself would have failed to have regard to these facts. In not having regard to these facts the Sheriff acted wholly unreasonably.

3. Further, and in any event, the Sheriff failed to have regard to Section 10(2) of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982. No evidence was advanced to him to show that the licensing authority was satisfied of the matters set out in Section 10(2). The Sheriff could not have been aware as to whether these matters were satisfied or not. In exercising his discretion to refuse the application he should have had regard to the implications of such a refusal.

4. Further, and in any event, the Sheriff failed to have regard to the fact that the Respondent was not opposing the application. No Sheriff properly directing himself would have failed to have regard to the fact that the application was not opposed.

5. Further, and in any event, had the Sheriff had regard to (a) the reason for seeking an extension of the time period set out by the Applicant; (b) the fact that the Respondent did not appear to oppose the extension; and (c) the requirement for the licensing

3
authority to be satisfied of the matters set out in Section 10(2) of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 he would have granted the application.

Further, and in any event, the Sheriff preceded upon an apprehension that "there are hundreds of other cases like these before the Court". No evidence was placed before the Sheriff to suggest that "there are hundreds of other cases like these before the Court". In fact to date the total number of similar actions raised in Edinburgh Sheriff Court in 2005 is twenty three. The Sheriff accordingly preceded upon a misapprehension of the facts.

and the Applicant requests the Sheriff to write a note Signed

Solicitor for the Applicant Rhidian Davies
The City of Edinburgh Council City Chambers
High Street
Edinburgh
EH1 1YJ

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

I will have a good look later, but it does look like good news.

Let's hope it continues.

_________________
IDFIMH

I wouldn't get too optimistic just yet there is a lot of mileage in this.

If you guys want your licenses every one of the other 23 applicants better get behind Mr Saltieri and organise a legal team to stop CEC from winning their appeal. I advise you contact Mr Saltieri today and ask him why he never appeared in court. He did his case great harm by not appearing because it showed he wasn't interested in the outcome. That could be remedied in the appeal if you get a good legal team.

You won't get a better opportunity than this to advance your case but it just goes to show how flawed sheriff Mackie's decision was in the first place and that you should have appealed her decision to the higher court, finances allowing.

For a Sheriff to make such a judgement without representations from the respondent just goes to show how contemptible he held the actions of CEC. The Sheriff has obviously thought that six months is ample time to make a decision as laid down by the law and that a further extension is an abuse of the 1982 act. I agree entirely but it was always my contention that not making a decision within the six months time frame in the first place was an abuse.

I just hope you guys can find the finances to back this guy in the appeal because it would seem to be your best shot. It serves as a warning to all those other applicants who have yet appear before the court for extension applications, to turn up and oppose the extensions. You better tell your colleagues this.

Regards

JD

So that I have things right, in the first case the lads had a brief and support from their mates in court, yet they lost.

But in the second case, there was no brief, and no-one even to put the pro more plates stance, yet the person won.

Hmmmmmmm.

_________________
IDFIMH

It will be interesting to hear what the appeal court says about Miss Mackie's decision.

Regards

JD

According to a source that shall remain nameless Sheriff Liddle is not only very well informed when it comes to the taxi trade but his father in-law is a High Court Appeal Judge. Apparently Gordon Liddle is no mug either and would not have taken this decision lightly, and unlike Sheriff Mackie he is not interested in towing the establishment line.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

As much as I hate to admit it money is not the real problem if you have a dedicated number of individuals with backbone. Unfortunately we don’t. Nor do they have the will to win. I can only hope they can see the opportunity afforded to them under the circumstances, but in all truth, I don’t. Quite honestly, without someone holding their hands and taking all the risks I don’t think they could win this on their best day. Unless of course the judicial system is prepared to bend over backwards and give it up.


Mr Salteri is [edited by admin] himself about the prospect of being forced to the forefront in this matter and I for one am not prepared to invest anymore time and money into the shallow and worthless few who want something for nothing. This is the classic case of another would be crusader who is up for the cause as long as someone else is prepared to take all the risks. Not forgetting the benefits that may be had by not pursuing this case through the appeals court.

It seems offers are on the table for this case to go no further.



I'll let you guess from who and why?

Before anyone thinks I've chucked in the towel, forget it, you'll be sorely disappointed.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

I suppose they could settle beforehand, but if they don't then it will go to court no-matter what Mr S says.

I would say the driver should look for help via one of the unions, but they are not for drivers, mearly multi-plate holders.

_________________
IDFIMH

As it stands now Mr Salteri has his license. The only hurdle in his way is the CEC appeal to the Sheriff Principal, If CEC lose that then CEC might go all the way to the Inner House of the Court of Session. Mr Salteri whether he likes it or not is in the limelight. If the case goes all the way to the higher court god knows what he will do but if he doesn't contest the appeal and he loses it by forfeit then he only has himself to blame.

Mr Salteri may get lucky if other applicants contest the extension of time applications by CEC and win. The Sheriff Principal would no doubt find it hard to overturn two or more decisions by individual Sheriffs. I think CEC might then think twice about appealing to the higher court although they are probably obstinate enough to do that.

Regards

JD

What could possibly be offered , to stop this case ?. streetcar .

Money!

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Don't know but think about it, 45K plate and a taxi driver who gets a free pass to the appeal courts and he wants to forfeit the chance of winning his plate by not opposing the council’s application. I already made him the offer of getting everyone together on this and he threw it back in my face. All the 23 remaining applicants have to do is back this action but Mr. Salteri is not interested.


I’ve had it with this lot for this very reason I have come to the conclusion that almost all the taxi drivers in Edinburgh have some sort of mental disorder which makes them subservient to the establishment in every way. Have you ever seen the film the Truman Show or the Matrix, well that’s what it’s like up here, only it’s not the red pill or the blue pill this lot are so far plugged in to the system if they look up they can see it’s tonsils. And everyone up here thinks I’m mad, they need to see it from where I stand. Surely it can’t be like this everywhere in the country.


I feel like I am trying to escape the Borg.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Most certainly not, in 70% of the country drivers are concerned more with earning a living and keeping safe.

Alas in areas with quotas, they don't give a f*** about anything bar taxi quotas, but it will change.

_________________
IDFIMH