Taxi Driver Online

This may have been the intention of parliament but I think it is far from being clear. Would it not have been simpler to say this if that was what was intended?

10(2) and 10(4) along with section 20 have been in the act since it first came into force. 10(2) is unamended. 10(4) and section 20 were added to by the DDA but nothing was taken out.
10(2) and 10(4) must be read together. Taking both together it seems to me that 10(4) is an instruction to councils on how to apply 10(2), in effect removing their discretion in the matter.
The only powers under section 20 that have been used were to do with carraige of guide dogs etc. Nothing at all about vehicles.
So where does that leave us? 10(2) states
It only says "satisfied". It does not say they can lay down their own criteria. 10(4) says that a vehicle is suitable if it complies with regulations under section 20 and is unsuitable if it doesn't.
As far as I can see anything is suitable, since anything would comply with zero regulations.


This act is as clear as mud and is without doubt a very poorly crafted piece of legislation.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

Well much legislation is clearly complex, but taking that into account it seems relatively clear - 10(2) in effect says that the council makes the rules, but if the SoS acts under section 20 then 10(4) becomes operative - that seems fairly clear to me.





Yes, but only if the SoS has exercised his powers under section 20, but the word "may" indicates the discetionary nature of this.



But aren't a local authorities powers to prescribe conditions set out in general terms elsewhere in the legislation?

Then you must be able to read it with more clarity than two Sheriffs - and me. I agree it could be read that way but that it is far from clearly the intention of parliament



It still doesn't say that though. It would be much simpler if it did.



If the powers are elsewhere in the legislation, please feel free to point them out.
The Renfrewshire Sheriff said said it was for the SoS by way of regulation and not councils by way of condition ......
For this reason he ruled that the council had acted "ultra vires".

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

Well no point in going round and round here gus, so I'm saying no more, but of course it will be intesting to see how it all pans out.

BTW, I thought the general power to impose conditions was contained in Schedule 1 section 5(1) which gives the council the power to grant or renew a licence 'subject to conditions'?

As I said before, as far as I read it the conditional nature of 10(4) is underlined by the fact that it's in a different paragraph. If the intention was to have the SoS always deciding vehicle policy by way of regulations then why not say in 10(2) what's said in 10(4)? If there was only one paragraph instead of two then the intention would be obvious, although it would conflict with the discretionary nature of 20(2), but then the conflict would be obvious and to that extent the legislation effectively useless.

I agree that reading the two subsections of section 10 in isolation could lead to conflicting interpretations, but when it's read in the context of section 20(2) then it's obvious that the intention was to make 10(4) conditional on the SoS exercising his discretion under 20(2).

Of course, you have a couple of cases on your side, but we shall see

Sorry, got my posts the wrong way round

As you say, were going round in circles. The Court of Session will decide next February and I'm sure we will all be interested in how they see it.

This is the complete paragraph I quoted earlier. It mentions Schedule 1 section 5:

"In effect, what Parliament appears to be saying in Section 20(2A) is that notwithstanding the generality of para 5 of Schedule I to the 1982 Act, it is for the Secretary of State by way of regulation and not for the individual Licensing Authority by way of conditions to make provision for the carrying in taxis of disabled persons. While I can empathise with Renfrewshire Council's intentions in introducing its policy I would have come to the view that it has no power so to do."

The Sheriff's reasoning and the cases he referred too are in the judgement.

http://taxi-driver.co.uk/files/sneddon.pdf

Save yourself a long dry read, the important bits are on pages 82 - 84

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/