Taxi Driver Online

Taxi driver decision ‘misguided’


Man caught while over alcohol limit can reapply for licence renewal

A taxi driver who was convicted of drink-driving has been allowed to reapply for his licence to be renewed – after Scotland’s second most senior judge branded a ruling by Aberdeen City Council “misguided”.

Steven Ritchie was disqualified from driving for a year on December 7, 2007, after getting behind the wheel when he was over the limit.

The offence did not take place in the course of his work.

Upon completion of a rehabilitation course, he was entitled to apply early for his domestic driving licence to be restored, which it was in August 2008.

His taxi driver’s licence was returned to him on September 7, 2008, but when he went to renew it the council’s licensing committee – which had received a letter of objection from the chief constable of Grampian Police – decided he was “not a fit and proper person” to hold it.

Members concluded that Mr Ritchie, of Newton of Rainnieshill, Newmachar, could “not be relied on to be a responsible taxi driver if he was prepared to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol”.

Mr Ritchie appealed against the decision and the case came before Sheriff Kieran McLernan at Aberdeen Sheriff Court on October 19, 2009, where it was dismissed on the grounds that the committee’s view was not “beyond the bounds of a reasonable exercise of discretion”.

In a judgment delivered at the Court of Session in Edinburgh on Thursday, however, Lord Justice Clerk Lord Gill called the committee’s decision “invalid”.

He said: “I consider the committee’s approach was misguided. There could be reasons, relating perhaps to the date of the offence or to the circumstances in which it was committed, that might justify the grant or renewal of a licence notwithstanding a conviction of this kind.

“Simply to decide that any such conviction is per se a conclusive ground for refusal in all cases is in my opinion unreasonable.”

Both Lord Mackay of Drumadoon and Lord Drummond Young agreed with Lord Gill’s assessment and their ruling means Mr Ritchie will now have the opportunity to reapply to the committee for the renewal of his taxi driver’s licence.

Mr Ritchie was contacted yesterday but said he could not comment at this stage as he still had to go through the process of reapplying.

The local authority said it would be inappropriate to comment as the matter was ongoing.

Licensing committee convener John Reynolds said: “Any of the history that has gone before will not be discussed and we will look at it as a new application.”



Read more: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Articl ... z1H2IWUF00

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

So Gary can reapply to get his taxi license reinstated as he was misguided by jasbar *insert tongue in cheek*

Back to me again

I really get up your nose, eh

You've made my day.

The fact that you are pleased to get up peoples noses, just goes to show what a sad attention seeking fool you really are.

I've seen drunks in Hunter Square, they get up lots of peoples noses.
That's something for you to aspire to.

Any chance we can actually talk about the decision at the top of the thread?

_________________

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

I guess it depends why he got drunk and drove in the first place as to whether he is likely to take that risk again and with passengers on board. We all make mistakes and that doesn't necessarily mean we're not 'fit & proper'.

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

Indeed but what does this say for a council's right to decide what is or isn't "fit and proper"?

Do they really have to wait until he's caught drunk on duty?

_________________

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

I agree with your sentiments, would I like this guy to carry my daughter home?

I seriously don't think so......

not until there's been a period of rehabilitation, I often think 12 months after the restoration of the driving license is adequate, but I'm probably alone in that........unless the judge is saying 9 months is adequate?

CC

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

Each case of rehabilition should be judged on it's own merits. Some take longer than others to be rehabilited so a standard time isn't really suitable imo

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

I am more hard line on this one.

I think any serious offence that generated a ban on its own, without totting up of points, should be sufficient to refuse a taxi licence for as long as the endorsment is on a driving licence.

The public have a need for trust in their driver, and to have drivers with drink drive convictions is degrading that trust.