Taxi Driver Online

OOps nearly forgot there is eight authorities hackneys at the airport(berwick has 3)
hmmmm

_________________
www.youtube.com/watch?v=z07K29Fc15U

The judge specifically said "I am anxious not to direct how Berwick, or any other local authority, should exercise their discretion which must be a matter for their own judgment"

That doesn't sound to me like he's telling a council how an application should be considered in fact he categorically and purposely takes a step back from telling a council how an application must be considered because he doesn't have the power to do so.

It must be a matter for Berwick to exercise its own discretion in this matter taking into account the terms of this judgment. While I cannot at the moment conceive of it being rational to grant a licence to those who intend to operate their hackney carriages remotely from Berwick-on-Tweed **I am not prepared to say that it is bound to be unlawful.**

The reason he is not prepared to say it is unlawful because he knows very well that it isn't unlawful. Therefore if its not unlawful there isn't a court in the land that will refuse a license unless the applicant is deemed not to be a fit and proper person.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

I would be quite happy for PH ops to be converted to PH/taxi ops, by the adding of one or two words to the definition of 'operate'.

I would also think it a good idea to change the wording of hackney carriage driver's licenses to include the words licensed to 'operate' a hackney carriage vehicle licensed by the same council.

_________________
IDFIMH

as per Sagnata Investments Ltd v Norwich Corp

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Totally irrelevant.

But if you care to try again you can take a "fifty - fifty", "phone a friend" or "ask the audience"?

You set out your reasoning why Sagnata is relevant and I'll tell you why it isn't.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

JD does CC know when to quit????????? hes about as welcome as a fart in a space suit

No its okay

Regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

My position is this Skippy, being impartial I don't have an issue with individual personalities because I like to believe that behind every disagreable opinion, lies a decent human being. The only issue that disturbs me is when some people intentionally mislead to make a point. This site welcomes all who wish to discuss the taxi trade and although sometimes personalities might clash and on occasions discussions get overheated we should not forget that everyone is entitled to their opinion. I think Alex and dusty will echo those sentiments and that is why TDO is what it is.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

If we lived in a world where everyone had the same opinion that would be very boring indeed.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

The IoL view on this.

http://www.instituteoflicensing.org/art ... nsing.html

_________________
IDFIMH

Should or could?

_________________
IDFIMH

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

As stated previously....if Berwick add a question to the application form asking where the applicant intends to use the vehicle, then at that point it will be interesting.

You stated this;

What about established case law that Councillors have an unfettered discretion to issue taxi licenses under the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 s 37: R (on the application of Johnson) v Reading Borough Council [2004] EWHC 765 (Admin), [2004] ACD 284.


I am confused a council either has unfettered discretion or it has not?

and you then stated;

a district council has no power to impose further restrictions on a licence holder plying for trade where he has been issued with a licence in respect of a prescribed distance

so i am double confused because the license is issued for the prescribed distance....nobody elses prescribed disatance.

You then state this;

And section 16,

The grant of a licence for a vehicle may be refused for the purpose of limiting the number of hackney carriages in respect of which licences are granted, if, but only if, the person authorised to grant the licence is satisfied that there is no significant demand for the services of hackney carriages (within the area to which the licence would apply) which is unmet.

I am drawn to the words;

for the purpose of limiting the number of hackney carriages

perhaps you could explain to me what the draftsman meant?

regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

It has an unfettered discretion to issue licenses where a policy of restriction is in place, it does not have an unfettered discretion to restrict licenses where no such policy is in place and they have no evidence of whether or not demand does or does not exist. In fact under current case law a council is obliged to issue licenses were no such evidence or policy exists to limit numbers, providing the applicant is fit and proper.

The law does not and has never stated that a license can be refused by way of post code.



The words prescribed and distance are immaterial, it just means the licensed area in which the council's powers of licensing are limited. Any lawful activity including private hire bookings undertaken by hackney carriages no matter where they are licensed, are not restricted to operations solely within the licensed area. The prescribed distance only applies to the operation of plying for public hire, there never has been and hopefully never will be legislation stating "it also includes hackney carriages working under the conditions of private hire".



It is self explanatory, providing the applicant is a fit and proper person the council can refuse licenses if and only if they have evidence of no unmet demand and can convince a court of law that that is the case.

There is and has never been any other provision in the longevity of this legislation that has precluded any person no matter where they live from obtaining a hackney carriage proprietor or drivers license.

I hope that explains the points you raised.

Regards

JD

_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.

It gives a view....not one I agree with, but I'd be disappointed if you thought otherwise.

In respect of your last point...fit and proper.

Surely a council can refuse a license if the vehicle I provide doesn't meet their criteria? That surely doesn't make the applicant unfit and improper?

regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin