Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sun Jan 25, 2026 11:19 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Cardiff judgement.
PostPosted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 11:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 6:09 pm
Posts: 1180
Location: Miles away from paradise, not far from hell.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Adm ... /2295.html

Alex

_________________
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

Simply the best taxi forum in the whole wide world. www.taxi-driver.co.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 3:35 am 
well he lost Mr Cummings, all that money and he could have been told free of charge on TDO

SILLY PILLOCK!

he had no chance of success.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 05, 2004 8:21 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 56975
Location: 1066 Country
I think the most telling part of the judgement is;

I accept that had it not been for the earlier decision in January and the challenge mounted by the claimant it is unlikely that the Committee would have ever turned to consider the question of de-restriction. But the fact that the earlier decision and the challenge triggered consideration of the issue does not mean to say that any defect in the process, by which the first decision was reached, tainted the second decision. The trigger for the decision to de-restrict played no part in the actual consideration as to whether to de-restrict. It could hardly be said that the decision was taken in order to deprive the claimant of licences to which he would otherwise have be entitled. After all, his challenge in January was made for the purpose of securing an entitlement to consideration of the grant of licences ahead of others. A decision in October resulted in him having any licences he wanted. The damage to him, which was advanced in his letter and, accordingly, considered by the Committee was in the damage to the market in transfer of licences. The Committee was entitled to reject the claimant's arguments in relation to damage to the market in transfer of licences and it was not argued before me to the contrary

In other words because you threatened the council with litigation, the council decided to de-limit.

But you have to wonder why he objected to others gaining 'free' plates, when he had been given many over the years. [-(

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cardiff judgement.
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 9:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
Alex wrote:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2004/2295.html

Alex


This guy is a fackin idiot, I'm glad he lost his pounds shillings and pence, it might make him read up on the law, before he puts his exalted aspirations to the test.

Best wishes


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:05 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 56975
Location: 1066 Country
I think it's a lesson to us all, in that being a greedy b*****d sometimes backfires.

According to the press he was number 2 and number 5 on the waiting list. Thus when the council decided to have a lottery over the 6 new plates, he decided to challenge it.

That decision has not only cost him huge legal costs, but also now his 50 odd plates are worth what the council issued them for.

I wonder how popular he now is with the rest of the Cardiff cab trade? :-k

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 79 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