Taxi Driver Online

A family firm has won its fight to start up Breckland's first limousine hire business. Alan Bell and his family ploughed all their cash into buying a tinted Lincoln Ford car to set up Bell's Limousines after he was made redundant from working as a production supervisor at Dereham trailer-maker Crane Fruehauf.

Yesterday Mr Bell, of Scarning, spoke of his relief after he won an appeal at Swaffham Magistrates Court against Breckland Council's refusal of a private hire licence for the business. Speaking after the hearing, Mr Bell said: "I am very pleased the magistrates have granted the appeal and we look forward to serving the people of Breckland. Bell's Limousines is now on the map."

During the appeal, Dave Foulkes, for Mr Bell, said that the three reasons given by Breckland Council's licensing committee's for rejecting the original application were flawed as limousines should be judged differently to other private hire vehicles.

He said: "They are not realistic conditions to apply to the extent that almost any limousine is likely to fail this test applied by the council. "What we have is haphazard development of policies relating to limousines across the county."

Chris Hepher, representing Breckland Council, said that Mr Bell had failed to make any of these arguments or seek legal representation at the committee meeting. He said: "The application made by Mr Bell was fairly lacking in merit because no rebuttals were given which would have rebutted any of the three policy assumptions."

Mr Hepher said that Breckland had adopted a policy of objecting to left-hand drive vehicles on police advice and its policy insisting on being able to see into a vehicle was related to public safety.

Court chairman Robert Woodhouse awarded the appeal with conditions the vehicle has safety check-ups every six months, should not be over 10-years-old and restricting its terms of use by under-18's. The court heard that Breckland Council is drawing up a separate policy to consider the licensing of limousine hire companies.

Mr Bell was unsuccessful in his application for costs as Mr Woodhouse felt the council had acted properly in considering the application.

_________________
IDFIMH

In all fairness to the lad I think the council were out of order.

The chap wanted to get licensed, isn't that what we all want?

_________________
IDFIMH

It is exactly what we wan't but will the council appeal? Your guess is a good as mine. If a magistrate can tear up a councils conditions about left hand drives etc what chance would the turning circle have of surviving in front of this particular magistrate? lol

Regards

JD

So can magistrates impose conditions in this manner?

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

errm why?

do Limos come with a this tyres not going to get worn leaflet?




or of course a policy whereby locals are best placed to decide, sometimes known as democracy



seem reasonable to me

CC

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

Magistrates can refuse the appeal or substitute its own decision or remit the case back to the licensing board with recomendations.

The council had no official policy on limousines therefore I suspect the court chairman made what he thought were reasonable conditions based on safety? The only contentious condition is the exclusion of passengers under 18?

In one particular judicial review the judge remarked that the Magistrates court offered a more comprehensive remedy that this court. Meaning that the magistrates had a wide ranging discretion in respect of licensing regulations and that the court of judicial review was limited only to the lawfull decision of the licensing authority. Naturaly the crown court is the extended arm of the Magistrates court and any decision of the magistrates can be appealed to that court.

Regards

JD

Least we forget the rule for costs against a licensing authority, in such matters of appeal?

The following judgement should be noted.

Bradford City Metropolitan District Council -v- Booth (2000) COD 338
10 May 2000
QBD

Silber J, Lord Bingham of Cornhil

The local authority had refused to renew a private hire vehicle licence. That refusal was successfully challenged, and the magistrates had awarded costs on the basis that they should follow the event.

The authority appealed. Held:

The discretion given to magistrates to award such costs as it feels are just and reasonable does not mean that costs should always normally follow the event.

An authority with a duty to make decisions which suffered a successful challenge to that decision, but where the fault in the decision fell short of being unreasonable, dishonest, or improper, should not normally be ordered to pay the costs.

The financial effect on the parties should be assessed, but such challenges are part of the expense of running a business.
.......................................................................

So although you may be successful in your appeal, the licensing authority may only have to pay costs if their original decision was wholly unreasonable, dishonest, improper or of similar behaviour?

If you are concerned about costs I would advise writing to the council exploring every avenue of their decision and the reasons why that decision was made and what it was based on. Ask them if they think their decision is reasonable and why they think it is reasonable? If you know of any information they should have considered but failed to consider ask them why? If you know of any information they considered but ought not to have considered, or placed too much weight on that or any other wrongful consideration, then ask them why?

Do not go to court unless you have all relevant questions asked and answered. This way you might just find a diamond in all those replies you obtained from the council which might enable you to obtain costs based on their decision being unreasonable or improper.

One to remember.

Regards

JD