Taxi Driver Online

No you are wrong it cannot mean that can it? I mean some propietors must have WAVs some not!

I could go on, no you must be wrong, stick to accountancy laws above you.

well hang on a minute, the law is clear on the five miles from a post office, then there is proscribed distance, for your info JD Ripponden has 2 ranks they are 9.8 miles apart.

they have 2 taxis too now then how can the proscibed distance be less than 5 miles ?

now read the law and research on the front page!

glad you was out when I rang though I was dissaponted at the time, I feell sure, you would have ended my career.

Law is not black or white but thousand shades of grey.

I have a good defense team, aND nIGE WILL ORGANISE MY PICKET.

LETS HOPE WE DONT SUFFER POST OFFICE CLOSURES

iT ISNT EFFECTIVELY PUT TO BED YOU KNOW
Jesus not by a long chalk, suppose a post office was on a boundary of a zone, this one nearly is, you imagine all zones have a built centre, well they dont

what proscribed distance could be less than 2.4 miles?

whos side are you on anyway.

better look up Kearns and Co.

now JD Tis right you are making assumptions, he did come to my rescue, but he has not "advised "me

no advice, no directions,

you have made some very wrong assumptions!

and no Yorkie does not think or ever has thought he can rank up anywhere in Calderdale thats a very poor and foolish accusation.

I always stick to the rules and the law, always have always will.

at some point you should be saying sorry

I'm on your side but whats a post office got to do with it?

The law states The commisioner may from time to time licence to ply for hire within the "prescribed distance" or if no distance is prescribed within 5 miles from the General post office of the city Town or place to which the special act refers.

It doesn't mean you can park yourself on any rank in any district just because it lays within 5 miles of your General Post office. I am assuming you are not licensed for the zone in which you plied for hire?

What policy Calderdale pursue for illegaly plying for hire I don't know but you surely can't believe you have not committed an offence under the terms of your license? What did the LO say when you told him you haven't committed an offence? lol

Has kearns found a case that we can all get our teeth into?

Regards

JD

Don't worry about me and Mr T he has tough skin. Makes a change me making wrong assumptions because its normally him lol. If you say you didn't take his advice then so be it. You are a wise man.

Regards

JD

I thought it was sports law.

_________________
IDFIMH

Don't worry about me and Mr T he has tough skin. Makes a change me making wrong assumptions because its normally him lol. If you say you didn't take his advice then so be it. You are a wise man.

Regards

JD
yorkie..say NO advice.....NO directions......mr T

Where did you get that quote from John?

Having had a quick read through the two Maud cases, I'm a bit more persuaded by Sussex's argument that they effectively outlaw zones.

The problem is that the case is not directly about zones as we normally think of them, but effectively having the whole LA as a zone for some HCs and a slightly smaller zone (ie the LA area excluding Benfleet station) for the new plates.

To that extent the judgent is not a direct precedent on zones, but in both the original case and the appeal there are certainly passages which support the view that LAs cannot zone their area in any shape or form.

Thus Yorkie's assertion about the PO is no longer valid, but there is in my opinion certainly material in the Maud cases that support the view that Calderdale shouldn't be zoned at all.

The judge below had taken the view that section 37 of the 1847 Act, by its language, only permitted the licence to be granted for a taxi to ply for hire across the whole of an authority's area. That was based on the words in that section, as amended by the 1875 Act, "a licence to ply for hire within any urban district". It is submitted by Mr Wolfe that those words do not have the meaning adopted by the judge but merely denote the area of the licensing authority's jurisdiction. In other words, they define the geographical extent of that jurisdiction. They do not, contends Mr Wolfe, require the licence to be granted for the whole of the district in question. Therefore, one should simply apply the conventional administrative law principles. Here, the purpose of the condition would have been within the legislative object of the powers under Section 47 of the 1976 Act, and emphasis is placed on the broad wording, as it is described, of that empowering section which deals with conditions.

16. For my part, I prefer the judge's construction of Section 37, particularly bearing in mind the history of the phrase now under consideration. In its original form the words read that the commissioners might "from time to time license to ply for hire within the prescribed distance"; I emphasise the last four words. An alternative to the prescribed distance was then given. It seems to me that those words "within the prescribed distance" did not relate ? or certainly did not relate solely ? to the jurisdictional area of the commissioners. They denoted where the hackney carriages, as they truly were at that time, could ply for hire. Those words were later replaced by the words "within any urban district", as Mr Wolfe emphasises. But I cannot accept that that alteration was intended to render the phrase solely a jurisdictional one rather than one dealing with the area where the vehicle could ply for hire.

17. There is to my mind an even stronger point against Mr Wolfe's contention. If he were right, it would enable an authority to create by its licensing system two classes of taxis: one unrestricted as to where a taxi could ply for hire and the other restricted. The latter would patently be a second class type of taxi which could not operate from all the stands or perhaps all the streets in the borough or district. That seems to me to be contrary to the whole legislative approach adopted more recently by Parliament in this area of activity, the approach being to allow, as far as possible, open competition in the trade. As Lord Justice Woolf said in R v Great Yarmouth Borough Council ex p Sawyer [1989] RTR 297 at 298, the policy of the Transport Act 1985 is ?
" ..... to remove restraints and allow market forces to take their course in a way which did not exist before Section 16 of the Transport Act 1985 came into effect."
In the same case Lord Justice Bingham (at page 303) referred to the Act of 1985 substituting "a free market policy" so long as the authority was not satisfied that there was no unmet demand. To bring into being a two?tier structure of licensed taxis within a district would fly in the face of that legislative approach.

18. In my view a condition preventing a taxi from plying for hire from a particular taxi stand or stands, or in a particular street or streets, would fall outside the scope of the powers granted by Parliament.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

The judge and the court of appeal seem to take the view that the 'prescribed distance' is effectively replaced by the 'within any urban district (ie an LA's area)' by the 1875 Act , rather than the former being complemented by the latter, which seems to be the view taken in your quoted.

The judge below had taken the view that section 37 of the 1847 Act, by its language, only permitted the licence to be granted for a taxi to ply for hire across the whole of an authority's area. That was based on the words in that section, as amended by the 1875 Act, "a licence to ply for hire within any urban district".

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

excuse me if I am getting it wrong

Yorkie is a zoned taxi coming under a LA, only allowed to work his allotted zone, he is licenced by the LA of that area, but can't work so and so area

well a few years ago when the goverment moved the boundaries in the city of York area to take in part of the Ryedale area, they also took in the part of Ryedale on the edge of York to which had 5 or 6 hackney carriages.

on the day of reckoning the 5 or 6 hacks from the Ryedale part became York zone taxis, within a month the owner of the said taxi firm Country Cabs of Haxby took the matter to court and the zoning was overturned by the magistrate on arguments that they was licenced by city of York and wanted to be the same as the city of York taxis
The owner of the taxi firm died a few years ago, but is still run by his partner, she was ex Ryedale legal taxi department, and still runs the taxi firm

maybe a few words to the owner to whom I would think be quite welcome to help you out in this case, I find no reference at all on the net to this case . her telephone number is Country Cabs 01904 765765, sorry I can't remember her name

She also successfully took the council to court with re advertising "cabs" on the side of PH vehicles, see below ref heading "York"

http://www.tapin2taxis.co.uk/court-cases.asp

City of York Council become a unitary authority on revised boundaries in April 1996. The new unitary authority area comprises the previous York City area and parts of the former districts of Harrogate, Ryedale and Selby.

JD

so what JD? cALDERDALE Became a unitary authority in 1975

the cases are paralel.

it seems to me you are beaten and wrong!

Nah he's never wrong Geoff FU***N hell