Meeting Minutes
Meeting Agendas
Members Forum
News
Case Law Handy Hints
Important & Useful Documents
Job Vacancies
Service Providers

Edit Login Details
Membership Renewal
Code of Practice

Abrahams v Bartlett

L.C.O.1934,Para 39

[1970] RTR 276

ALTERNATE CHARGES

Alternate charges are exclusive & cannot both be proven on one set of circumstances

Binding

Y

Adamson v Waveney B.C

LG(MP)A 1976, S51+59

[1997] 2 All ER 898

SPENT CONVICTIONS

Can be considered by Council if no other way to be fair & chance given to mitigate [SEE NOW Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 [Exceptions] [Amendment] order 2002, SI 2002 No. 441]

Binding

Y

Adur D.C. v Fry

LG(MP) A 1976, Ss46(1)(e)(i + ii), S80(1)

CO 25/95 QBD[DC]HIGH COURT

OPERATE

defined in relation to S46(1)(e) offences when viewed in light of definition "operate" in S80(1) of the 1976 Act

Binding

Y

Albert v Motor Insurers Bureau

RTA 1988 S143 (RTA 1960,S203(1)(4)(a)

[1972] RTR 230

HIRE AND REWARD

Defined as if beyond mere social kindness then was hire & reward. If used so on one occasion then was " a vehicle used for hire & reward".

Binding

Y

Alker v Woodward (unreported) [known as the Liverpool case]

TPCA 1847, S45

[1962]Times Law Reports [Feb 17,]

PLYING FOR HIRE

By marked "radio taxi" at OR on unmarked HC Stand near to Hotel in late evening / early morning [CASE REMITTED TO CROWN TO BE ANSWERED]

Persuasive

Y

Allen v Trowbridge

MPCA,1869

[1871] 35 JP 695

PLYING FOR HIRE

Driver of Brougham on Rail station who exposed carriage for hire plied for hire although not a street [note based on London Act with difference in wording to 1847 Act.]

Binding

Y

Armitage v Wilson

L.C.A 1968 S4(2)

[1975] RTR 160

ADVERTISEMENTS RELATING TO HIRE VEHICLES

Dependant on whether advert makes clear vehicle is or is not a licensed Hackney Carriage

Binding

Y

Arrowsmith v Jenkins

Highways Act 1959, S121

[1963] 2 All ER 212

OBSTRUCTION

To prove wilful obstruction you must prove that without authority by free will that someone does or omits to do something which causes the obstruction. Intention is not required.

Binding

Y

Assoc. Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corp.

ALL ACTS

[1947] 2 All ER 680, CA

REASONABLE and COURTS DUTIES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW

Defined the court's duties and powers in regards to reviewing decisions of the Councils. Duty is to ensure reasonably arrived at and reasonable on the merits of the case duly decided in accordance with the Council's powers under the 1976 Act and other legislation

Binding

Y

Atkins v Green

L.C.A 1968 S4(2)

[1970] RTR 332

ADVERTISEMENTS RELATING TO HIRE VEHICLES

Dependant on whether advert makes clear vehicle is or is not a licensed Hackney Carriage

Binding

Y

Attridge V Attwood [R v Plymouth CC ex parte Attridge]

TPCA 1847, S62 and RTRA 1984, S5(1)

J.P. & L.G.Review

CAB RANK

Driver of Motor Cab commits offence if leaves vehicle unattended in breach of Road Traffic Order. RANK: Is for standing/Plying from only.

Binding

Y

Backer v Sec.State for Environment & another

Caravan Sites..,.Act 1960

[1983] 2 All ER 1021

ADAPTED

Defined in RTA cases means apt, fit or suitable. In other matters can mean adapted by alteration to a particular use.

Binding

Y

Bailey v Geddes

Ped.Crossing Regs 1935, S3-4

[1937] CA, 671

ABSOLUTE DUTY TO OBSERVE PEDEST. CROSSING

Held that there was an absolute duty on a motorist to stop for a pedestrian on a crossing and contributory negligence of the pedestrian cannot be claimed as a defence

Binding

Y

Baker v Chapman

Road Traffic Act 1960,S127

[1963] LGR 527

CAUSE, PERMIT OR USE

An owner of vehicle uses it both when he drives it AND also when someone else does so on his instruction

Binding

Y

Barass v Reeve

Soc.Sec.A,1975,S146(3)( c) (i)

[1980] 3 All ER 705

FALSE STATEMENT

In a social security case it was held that it was not necessary to prove that a false statement was made in order to obtain a benefit. It was merely necessary to prove that the defendant knew the statement was false.

Binding

Y

Barber v Carter & another

L.C.A 1968 S4(1)(b)(3)

[1970] RTR 39

ADVERTISEMENTS RELATING TO HIRE VEHICLES

Dependant on whether advert makes clear vehicle is immediately or presently available

Binding

Y

Benson v Boyce

LG(MP)A 1976, s46(1)(b)

CO 2409-06 QBD 20th January 1997

DRIVING LICENSED PH VEHICLE

Any person driving a private hire vehicle for any purpose other than a prebooked vehicle fitness test must be a licensed private hire driver. All licences must be from same authority.

Binding

Y

Birmingham & Midland Motor Omnibus Co v Thomson

TPCA 1847, S45 (and also S37)

[1918] The Law Times, KB, Vol 119, 140

PLYING FOR HIRE

Omnibus need not be on a street but a plying S38 1847 Act Hackney Carriage did need to be displayed to Public & on a street(Obiter Dicta)

Binding

Y

Bly v Godfrey

TPCA 1847

[1922] 86 JP 82

MORE THAN PERMITTED FARE

Held that the offence was committed at the end of journey - matters as to jurisdiction of Magistrates Court

Binding

N

Borders v Swift

RTA

[1957] Crim.L.R 194, DC

INSURANCE

If a court can satisfy itself as to insurance from a certificate then the policy MAY not need to be produced.

Binding

N

Bowers v Gloucester Corporation

TPCA 1847, S40

[1963] 1 All ER 437

REVOCATION OF LICENCES

UNDER THE TPCA 1847 ACT- Two different offences could provide the statutory grounds to revoke. It did not have to be the same offence twice.

Binding

Y

Bradford City MC v Booth

MagCts Act 1980, S64(1) & LGMPA, 1976, S63(2)

Times Wed.31/05/00 & [2000] 164 JP 801

COSTS AWARDS IF COUNCIL LOSES

When a Statutory Function is exercised by a Council costs may not necessarily follow the event if the Council has acted reasonably but the Court has decided against them. It is a matter for the Courts to decide in each case [BINGHAM LCJ & SILBER J.]

Binding

Y

Braintree DC v Howard

LG(MP) A 1976, Ss46(1)(d)+80

[1993] RTR 193

CROSS BORDER HIRE

In connection with NON CONTROLLED DISTRICT/CROSS BORDER:HELD:1) S56(1) applies to licensed Operators only & 2)S75(1) only applies to cars bringing people into district & not otherwise.

Binding

Y

Breame v Anderson & another

L.C.A 1968 S4(1)(b)(3)

[1971] RTR 31

ADVERTISEMENTS RELATING TO HIRE VEHICLES

Dependant on whether advert makes clear vehicle is immediately or presently available

Binding

Y

Brighton BC ex parte Bunch and others

TPCA 1847, S37-38

CO/192/88

UNMET DEMAND

HELD:Demand related to demand for only those services that a hackney carriage could provide and must be a broad approach view over the whole week of work

Binding

Y

Britain v ABC Cabs (Camberley) Ltd ( see Rushmoor BC below)

LG(MP) A 1976, S46(1)(d)

[1981] RTR 395

OPERATE

defined in relation to S46(1)(d) offence

Binding

Y

Bromsgrove D.C v Powers

LG(MP) A 1976, S46(1)(e)

CO/3624/97 16th July 1998 EWHC Admin 755

OPERATORS SUBCONTRACTING WORK

An operator cannot subcontract work to an operator in another district and if he so does then that can be sufficient cause to refuse to renew an Operator's licence

Binding

Y

Browning v Wilson

RTA 1934, S25(1)

[1953] 2 All ER 775

PERMIT

Owners of vehicles should take precautions to ensure requirements met. If they do not & offences occur then they can be convicted.

Binding

Y

Bygraves and Dicker

TPCA 1847, Ss 45-63

[1923] All ER 473

VICARIOUS LIABILITY OF OWNER

HCV Owner liable for acts of self-employed driver- Any party who is injured due to drivers negligence can obtain damages from vehicle owner.

Binding

Y

Cartwright v Mc Cormick (Trafalgar Insurance below)

RTA 1988, S143

[1963] 1 All ER

INSURANCE

ISSUE TIMES-DEFINED AS TO WHEN IN FORCE

Binding (Ct. Appeal)

Y

Challoner v Evans

TPCA 1847

Times Law Reports 22nd November 1986

RENTING OF HACKNEY PLATE AFTER SALE OF VEHICLE

If a licensed vehicle is sold the plate resides with the vehicle and cannot be rented out separately

Binding

N

Cinnamond & others v British Airports Authority

Heathrow Byelaws 1972

[1980]RTR 220

VALIDITY OF BYELAWS

If desirable for discharge of function then if possible should be held valid & not invalid (per Denning MR)

Binding

Y

Clarke v Stanford

MPCA 1869, Ss4,7

6 QB, 357

PLY FOR HIRE RAILWAY PROPERTY [LONDON]

If a driver displayed a vehicle but could not contract for hire but directed hirers to an office first then he could still ply for hire even if the railway land was leased to the carriage owner.

Binding

N

Cocks v Mayner

TPCA 1847, s45

[1894] 58 JP 104

PLYING FOR HIRE-Voluntary contributions

An omnibus plied for hire contrary to S45 even if it only requested or accepted voluntary contributions. Despite the lack of a contract a plying took place.

Binding

Y

Cogley v Sherwood (Skyport Ltd) known as the Airport Case)

MPCA1869, S7

[1959] 2 All ER 313

PLYING FOR HIRE

Hackney Carriage must be exhibited to the public in order to ply for hire

Binding

Y

Corkery v Carpenter

Licensing Act 1872, s12

[1950] 2 All ER 745

CARRIAGE DEFINED

A Bicycle can be a "carriage" and so if used for plying i.e. rickshaw, must be licensed hackney carriage

Binding

Y

Crack v Holt

TPCA 1847, S45

[1927] The Law Times, Vol 136-pg511

PLYING FOR HIRE

Omnibus plied within the prescribed distance even though it did not do so on a street.

Binding

Y

Crawford v Haughton

Con & Use Regs,1986

[1972] 1 All ER 535

USE OF VEHICLE

If an owner allowed another to use an unroadworthy vehicle he could be charged with causing or permitting its use. He could not, unless the driver was a direct servant of his be prosecuted for use of the vehicle but could be for permitting the use.

Binding

Y

Crawford v Haughton

RTA 1960, s60

[1972] 1 All ER 535

CAUSE/PERMIT

If an owner allowed another to use an unroadworthy vehicle he could be charged with causing or permitting its use. He could not, unless the driver was a direct servant of his be prosecuted for use of the vehicle but could be for permitting the use.

Binding

Y

Crawley BC v Crabb

LG(MP)A 1976, S51(1)(b)

[1996] RTR 201; 17 WRTLB[145]

DVLA MINIMUM ENTITLEMENT

That a cumulative 12 months entitlement satisfied the requirement to hold a licence for 12 months. Did not mean 12m immediately prior to application

Binding

Y

Crawley BC v Ovenden

LG(MP)A 1976 S75(1)(b)

[1992] RTR 60

CONTRACT

To fall under the S75 exemption a contract must relate to identified vehicle & must specify a minimum length of no less than 7 days exclusive of all other contracts.

Binding

Y

D(An infant) v Parsons

Road Traffic Act 1930,S35,1 [NOW s143, RTA 1988

[1960] 2 All ER 493

UNKNOWINGLY CARRIED ON UNINSURED UTMV

If a person was carried on a UTMV unknowingly he could not be charged with aiding UTMV or using with no insurance unless it could be proved that he acted in concert with an offender.

Binding

Y

Darlington B.C. v Paul Wakefield

LG(MP) A 1976, S59(1)

[1988] J.P. 481

APPEALS

To be heard "De Novo" as a complete rehearing of the case in order to satisfy natural justice [see also Sagnata Investments v Norwich]

Binding

Y

Dittah v Birmingham C.C ( Choudhry v Birmingham CC)

LG(MP) A 1976, S46(1)(d)

[1993] RTR 356

OPERATE

defined in relation to S46 offences. S55 Operator may only use vehicles & drivers licensed by his own authority.

Binding

Y

DPP v Computer Cab Co Ltd

Lond. Cab Order 1934 Para 31(1)(iii)

[1995] Road Traffic Reports April-May

BOOKING FEES FOR HCV'S [IN LONDON]

Booking Fee allowed [APPLICABLE LONDON ONLY-1976 ACT DISALLOWS FEES UNLESS ALLOWED FOR IN SET TARIFF

N/Applic. Outside London

Y

DPP v Marshall

PACE 1984, s78

[1988] 2 All ER 683

ENTRAPMENT

If a trader, in breach of licence, sold goods to an officer it was lawful to make purchase in order to provide needed evidence. [see also R v Looseley, AG Ref No. 3 of 2000]

Binding

Y

DPP v Sikondar

PPVA 1981

[1993] RTR90

HIRE & REWARD

Defined by reference to whether beyond bounds of mere social kindness or as in this case a regular pattern of trips.

Binding

Y

Dudley MBC v Debenhams PLC

PACE 1984, CODE B

CO/3537/93 13th July 1994

SEARCH NOTICE [PACE] REQUIREMENTS FOR

Held: If premises entered with a suspicion that an offence MAY POSSIBLY have been committed then CODE B PACE applies and a Notice must be served. Applies to Operator checks to confirm if driver has plied etc.

Binding

Y

Eastbourne BC v Stirling & Morley

S45 TPCA 1847 & S76 PHA 1925

[2000] EWHC Admin 410 CO/1508/2000

PLYING FOR HIRE ON RAILWAY PREMISES

Held: In the absence of any Local Act a Council should formally adopt S76 of the Public Health Act 1925 if it wishes to extend HC Bylaws & regulations to railway premises

Binding

Y

Eccles v Kirk

TPCA 1847, S38

[1949] 1 All ER 428

HCV PLATES- WHAT MUST BE DISPLAYED ON

HCV PLATES:HELD: Must state Hackney Carriage & give seating capacity

Binding

Y

Eldridge v British Airports Authority

LHCA 1831, S31

[1970] RTR 270

STANDING FOR HIRE

Defined as more than merely parked but akin to waiting

Binding

Y

Elliott v Grey

Road Traffic Act 1930,S35,1 [NOW s143, RTA 1988

[1959] 3 All ER 733

USE ON A ROAD

Defined as having had the use of on a road. A vehicle which could be moved(even engineless) was used and a charge of no insurance was found proven

Binding

Y

Evans v Dell

RTA 1934, S25(1)

[1973] 1 All ER 349

PERMIT

Held that Owners of vehicles cannot shut their eyes to plain facts.An owner with no knowledge of improper use cannot be found guilty unless mens rea proved.

Binding

Y

Ferrymasters v Adams

[1980] Crim LR 187

PERMIT

An owner was liable for permitting unlicensed driver if he had failed to set up a system of reasonable checks to ensure was licensed

Binding

Y

Foinett v Clark

MPCA 1869, S7

[1878] 41 JP 359

PLYING FOR HIRE

Where an owner of Broughams hired land from a rail Company and had them available upon application a plying for hire had occurred as the vehicle was exposed in view

Binding

Y

Gaumont British Distributors v Henry

DMPPA,1925,S1,a

[1939] 2All ER 808

KNOWINGLY

Defined in relation to offences. May be of use in backing up more direct cases.

Persuasive

Y

Ghafoor & others v Wakefield MBC

TPCA1847, S37+ TA1985, S16

[1990] RTR 389

UNMET DEMAND FOR HCV's

HELD: 1) Council must issue if unsure of demand; 2) A Council can inform itself on demand; 3) Council to prove no unmet demand to civil standard

Binding

Y

Gilbert v McKay

MPCA 1869, S7

[1946] 1 All ER 458

PLYING FOR HIRE

Where vehicles ranked up adjacent to an office & people paid within the office & then took passengers a "Plying for Hire" had occurred. See also VANT v CRIPPS

Binding

Y

Goodman v Searle

LHCA 1853

[1947] 2 All ER 318 DC

PRESCRIBED DISTANCE HCV's

HELD Tariff of Fares only applicable if not past P.D. After that can agree rate for job.

Binding

Y

Hallett Silberman Ltd v Cheshire C.C.

S42 RTA 1988[Con & Use Regs]

[1993] RTR32, Times Law Reports [9/6/92]

USER OF VEHICLE

Where company employs self employed driver then Company may be regarded as USER of the vehicle and prosecuted accordingly.

Binding

Y

Hawkins v Edwards

TPCA 1847, S38

[1901] 65 J.P. 423 (Justice of the Peace)

HACKNEY CARRIAGE definition

Definition of HCV as a vehicle used for standing or plying from time to time not necessarily at instant of offence.

Binding

Y

Hawkins v Edwards

TPCA 1847, S38

[1901] 65 J.P. 423 (Justice of the Peace)

HACKNEY CARRIAGE PLATE DISPLAY

PLATE MUST BE DISPLAYED FOR WHOLE OF LICENCE PERIOD

Binding

Y

Holmes v Sefton

TA 1985

A19990450, L'pool Crown Ct, 29th Feb 2000

UNMET DEMAND

Burden falls on local authority to prove an unmet demand and a survey over 5 years old is probably unsafe to rely on. Recommended a survey be donne & consider rather than a knee jerk derestriction of numbers

Persuasive

Y

House & Others v Reynolds (Streamline Taxis Southampton)

TPCA 1847, S55,S58

[1977] RTR 135

BOOKING FEES FOR HCV's OUTSIDE LONDON

Firm making bookings for Hackney Carriage CANNOT charge a booking fee over and above the tariff unless the tariff permits such a fee.

Binding

Y

Hulin v Cook and another

TPCA1847 Ss 37,45,68, & BR Byelaw 22(2)(c)

[1977] RTR 345

HCV ON RAIL PREMISES

HELD 1) An offence committed if plied for hire without licence and: 2) Any HC plying on Railway Premises needed a Local Authority licence and permission from British Rail under byelaw.

Binding

Y

Hunt v Morgan

Lon.HCA 1853,Ss 7+17(2)

[1948] 2 All ER 1065

HACKNEY CARRIAGE REFUSING TO BE HIRED

Driver of Hackney Carriage can only commit offence of refusing if on a rank or stationary and exhibited to Public. Whilst mobile cannot commit as not in "place".

Binding

Y

Information Commissioner v Islington LBC

DPA 1984 , S5

[2002] Times Law Reports, 3rd June

DATA REGISTRATION

If a Council used data for which the Data Registration had expired then the Council was liable for the offence even if the officer concerned was reckless or unknowing of the registration having expired.

Binding

Y

John v Humphreys

RTA 1930, (now RTA 1988)

[1955] 1 All ER 793

POSSESSION OF LICENCE-PROOF

The burden of proof for the possession of a licence is for defendant to prove as was within his own knowledge.

Binding

Y

Kelly and Another v Wirral MBC

TPCA 1847, S38, Trans.Act 1980, S15

[1996] Times Law Report 13th May

UNMET DEMAND FOR HCV's

HELD:1) Court can determine demand or remit to Council; 2)Failure to determine gives right of appeal, procedural delay may not;

Binding

Y

Khan v Evans

TPCA1847, S45 & BR Byelaw 2(2)/22(c)

[1984] RTR 33

HCV ON RAIL PREMISES

If a cab on a street answered a flag on rail premises the contract was made on rail premises an permission under Rail Byelaw 22(c) was required as well as S38 TPCA licence.

Binding

Y

Kingston Upon Hull CC v Wilson

LG(MP)A1976, s46(1)(a)

CO-1249-95 QBD HIGH COURT, 29TH JUNE 1995

DUAL LICENSING

HCV licensed in one area could be a PHV licensed in another area.S80 looks at the function of a carriage not its inherent identity.

Binding

Y

Kingston Upon Hull CC v Wilson

LG(MP)A1976, s46(1)(a)

CO-1249-95 QBD HIGH COURT, 29TH JUNE 1995

OPERATOR DIVERTING CALLS

Held that an Operators licence at one premises did not entitle a telephone diversion to another. Operating at the 2nd premises needed to be licensed also

Binding

Y

Kingston Upon Hull CC v Wilson

LG(MP)A1976, s46(1)(a)

CO-1249-95 QBD HIGH COURT, 29TH JUNE 1995

PROOF OF ADOPTION OF 1976 ACT

Held that where a Council did not formally prove that it was a controlled district then a submission of "no case to answer" would succeed

Binding

Y

Latif v Middlesborough Council

LG[MP]A 1976, Ss 46,51

CO/4452/96

KNOWINGLY

Defined what constitutes "knowingly" for the purposes of the 1976 Act

Binding

Y

Leeds C.C. v Azam & another

LG(MP) a 1976, S75(1)

[1989] RTR 67

EXEMPTION-BURDEN OF PROOF

EXEMPTIONS:HELD: where a persons defence relies upon a statutory exemption the burden of bringing the defendant within that exemption falls upon the defendant & not the prosecution

Binding

Y

Leeds C.C. v Hussain

LG[MP] 1976, Ss 60,61

BLD 2405021959, Admin Ct. 23/05/2002

SUSPENSION OF LICENCES

HELD: 1) That there was no need for a finding of guilt before a suspension on grounds of pending assault charges 2) Hearsay evidence was admissible in supensions on "reasonable cause" grounds 3) The impact on a drivers livelihood if he were eventually acquitted should not properly be taken into account as an authority had to consider the effect on the travelling public of his continued working pending trial.

Binding

Y

Levinson v Powell

LHCA 1853

[1967] 3 All ER 796

CAB LEFT UNATTENDED DELIVERING PARCEL

A cab was a dual purpose and not a "goods vehicle" and could not therefore avail itself of an exemption for goods vehicles loading and unloading

Persuasive

Y

Liverpool C.C. v Worthington & Others

Mag.Cts.Act 1980, S111(3)

[1998] Times Law Reports , 16th June 1998

APPEAL-TIME LIMITS

21 days for appeal calculated from last action ie costs hearing etc. (High Ct)

Binding

Y

Liverpool C.C. v Kelly

LG[MP] 1976, S70

Lawtel 20/02/03 AC104566 Case A2/2002/1686 (Court of Appeal)

CHARGES-TESTING VEHICLES FOR FITNESS TO LICENCE

A Council could charge for testing vehicles prior to licensing even if the vehicles failed and were not licensed. Fees could be resolved as 1st Inspection + "Pass" inspection + final licence fee to produce a total fee.

Binding

Y

Lloyd v Singleton

Road Traffic Act 1930,S35,1 [NOW s143, RTA 1988

[1953] 1 All ER 291

PERMITTING NO INSURANCE

HELD:A person other than the owner of a vehicle could permit no insurance if he was de facto in charge of the vehicle and permitted its use whilst uninsured

Binding

Y

London Borough of Islington v Panico

ALL ACTS

[1973] 3 All ER 485

EXEMPTION-BURDEN OF PROOF

Onus on defendant to prove exemption applies to him/her (see also Leeds CC & Pitts v Lewis)

Binding

Y

Lyons v Denscombe

RTA 1930 S6(1)

[1949] 1 All ER 977

PLYING FOR HIRE

Definition given for both plying for hire and private hire vehicle

Persuasive

Y

Mallon and Another V Allon

B & GA,1960,S5

[1963] 3 All ER 843

KNOWLEDGE- BURDEN OF PROOF

KNOWLEDGE;HELD:Knowledge can include a deliberate shutting of one's eyes to a situation as well as the more obvious actual knowledge. It is for the prosecution to prove "knowledge" in each case

Binding

Y

Mc Carthy & Stone (Developments) v Richmond on Thames LBC

LGA 1972, S111 (LG(Records)A 1962)

[1991] 4 All ER 897 (House of Lords)

FEES AND CHARGES

Councils could charge for matters incidental or conducive to duties but not for pre-application advice. General rule is that an Act must gve the right to charge before a charge may be levied.

Binding

Y

Mc Kenzie v DPP

RTOA 1984

[1997] RTR 175

LOADING WITHIN ROAD TRAFFIC RESTRICTION

A cab could wait only so long as to pick up or drop off passengers within A DOUBLE WHITE LINE SYSTEM. Any further delay constitutes an offence

Binding

Y

McCool v Rushcliffe B.C.

LG(MP) A 1976 S51(1) [+59(1)

[1998] 3 All ER 889

APPEALS - HEARSAY ON ACQUITTALS CAN BE RELEVANT

Civil burden of proof required and pertinent hearsay could be considered if appropriate. Evidence of appelant lying in criminal proceedings could be relevant.

Binding

Y

Middlesborough Council v Safeer & others

RTA 1988, S143+ LGA1972, S222

CO/397/2001 High Court, 26th June 2001

RIGHT OF COUNCILS TO PROSECUTE

held: Councils could prosecute for Road Traffic matters including No insurance [in10] offences if in interests of the inhabitants of area. RTOA did not prevent this.

Binding

Y

Milton Keynes BC v Paul Barry

TPCA 1847, S45

CO/1348/83 QBD High Court 3rd July 1984

PLYING FOR HIRE

A Private Hire car which, on completing its journey remained in close proximity to a hackney carriage stand was clearly plying for hire when it remained for more than two or three minutes

Persuasive

Y

Montgomery v Loney

[1959] NI 171

ROAD

Defined so as to include a Petrol Station Forecourt as a road or other public place. Public had access albeit that only those wishing to do business there did so.

Persuasive

N

Moran v Sefton MBC

LG(MP)A 1976, S51+59

Liverpool Crown Case A98 0588/ 4/2/1999/ Judge MacKay

FIT & PROPER-DETERMINATION OF APPLICATIONS

A Council with a fair policy which permitted discretion and individual consideration was correct in refusing a person due to convictions. A Council which did not so do was at fault & remiss.

Persuasive

Y

Mumford v Hardy

RTA 1988 , S143

[1956] 1 All ER 337

INSURANCE

HELD: An offence will still be committed even if the insurance company accepts liability on a mistaken view of the law relating to that policy

Binding

Y

Murtagh & Carter (T/A Rubery Rednal Cars) v Bromsgrove D.C.

LG(MP) A 1976 S46

LTL 18/10/99 Extempore Doc.C9300212 DC (Kennedy LJ V-P, Jowitt J) 15/10/99

OPERATE DEFINED RELATING TO FREEPHONES IN OTHER AREAS

HELD: An Operator licensed in one district could not install dedicated freephones in another district without falling foul of S46 of the 1976 Act. NOTE.IN THE JUDGEMENT IT WAS COMMENTED THAT THIS WAS THE LAW BUT THAT IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN PARLIAMENTS INTENT AND IT SHOULD BE REFERRED TO THE LEGISLATORS FOR AMENDMENT

Binding

Y

Nagy v Weston

Highways Act, 1959, S121

[1965] 1 All ER 96

OBSTRUCTION

Held: requires proof of unreasonableness and depends on circumstances

Binding

Y

Nicholls v Brentwood Justices

Interpretation.A 1980

[1991] 3 All ER 359

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION AS TO GENDER AND PLURALITY

S6 of the IA 1980 means singular includes plural AND VICE VERSA unless the legislation clearly states otherwise

Binding

Y

Nottingham C.C. v Amin

TPCA 1847, S45 & PACE 1984, S78

[1999]BOS Off.Transcripts

ENTRAPMENT

HELD- Exclusion of evidence is only OK if prevents fair trial-If merely provides opportunity which is taken up evidence MAY BE fairly obtained dependent on circumstances

Binding

Y

Nottingham C.C. v Farooq

LG(MP) A 1976 S51

Licensing Bulletin, April 1999

FIT & PROPER PERSON

HELD: False ly omitting convictions from an application can constitute a person as not fit and proper and thus allow a Council to refuse/revoke.

Binding

Y

Nottingham C.C. v Woodings

TPCA 1847, Ss 37-45

[1994] RTR 72

PLYING FOR HIRE

Once driver has by pro active conduct indicated he will take unbooked fare then is plying for hire. By merely standing at roadside he is not. Use of Agent Provocateur approved.

Binding

Y

O'Toole v Scott

Mag.Ct.Act 1952(NOW 1980)

[1965] 2 All ER 240 (PRIVY COUNCIL)

APPEARANCE IN PROCEEDINGS

A Magistrate has discretion to allow anyone to conduct a case if it is in the interests of Natural Justice for the case to proceed.

Binding

Y

Philcox v Carberry

RTA 1930 S35 [now the RTA 1988 S143]

[1960] Criminal Law Review.563[QBD]

INSURANCE-BURDEN OF PROOF

HELD. The onus was on a defendant to prove he was insured & not on the prosecution to prove he was not

Binding

Y

Phipps v Mc Cormick

RTA1960 S241(2)(c)

[1972] RTR 21

SERVICE OF NOTICES

HELD: Notices of intended prosecution should be delivered to usual last known address being an address with some degree of permanence. NB The address will vary according to circumstances.

Binding

Y

Pitts v Lewis

LG(MP) a 1976, S75(1)

[1989] RTR 71, DC

CONTRACT

Defined as "Contract for 7 days means available for all 7 days". Vehicle must be identified in "contract" & not substituted.

Binding

Y

Powell v May

BYELAWS

[1946] 1 All ER 444 DC

VALIDITY OF BYELAWS

Will be held repugnant if contrary to the general law of the land

Binding

Y

Provincial Motor Cab Co v Dunning

[1909] 73 JP 387

USING WITH DEFECTS

HELD: Rust etc points to lack of maintenance despite systems for checking & should be considered by Bench in proceedings.

Binding

N

R [Westminster CC] v Parking Adjudicator

RTA 1991

[2002] Times Law Reports 22nd May

DECRIMINALISED PARKING APPEALS

The Parking Adjudicator cannot discount multiple penalties by first taking into account mitigating circumstances

Binding

Y

R v Assistant Commissioner Metroplitan Police ex parte Malcolm Lubin

Transport Act 1985, S17

[1999] EWHC Admin 398

APPEAL ON THE SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION OF [LONDON] HACKNEY CAB DRIVERS LICENCES

If an applicant, with notice, fails to appeal within the time allowed by default of himself or his advisers he cannot then usually obtain Judicial Review of the decision on the grounds of procedural impropriety or error by the other party.

Persuasive

Y

R v Asst. Commissioner Metropolitan Police ex parte Howell

London Cab Order 1934

[1986] RTR 52

APPLICATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE TO RENEWALS

HELD: That natural justice applied and applicant should be able to make representations before final decision to refuse to grant was made.

Binding

Y

R v Asst. Commissioner Metropolitan Police ex parte Lubin

London Cab Order 1934

[1999] EWHC Admin 398 CO/2600/98

APPLICATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE TO REVOCATIONS OF LICENCE

HELD: That natural justice applied and applicant should be able to make representations before final decision to refuse to grant was made. If failed to take up opportunity or procedurally failed to comply then revocation could be upheld

Binding

Y

R v Banaster

Theft Act 1968 S15(1)(4)

[1979] RTR 113

DECEPTION AS TO FARE

Where a minicab driver(or HC Driver) implied a status or set fare was correct (by deception) then he had committed the theft offence

Binding

Y

R v Bayliss

PACE 1984, S67(9)

[1993] 157 JP 1062

INVESTIGATING OFFICERS TO FOLLOW PACE

Codes of Practice:HELD: Codes of Practice to be folowed by persons charged with investigating offences. Not just under Statutory Duties but including Store Detectives etc under contract or similar

Binding

Y

R v Bedford BC

Local Govt. Act 1972, S101 powers & libels

2 All ER 456 [2003]

POWER OF COUNCILS TO INDEMNIFY OFFICERS LEGAL COSTS WHEN OFFICERS LIBELLED

HELD: A Council could indemnify officers for the cost of prosecuting libels against them which would otherwise ruin their careers etc so long as it was the officer's reputations and NOT the Councils that were being protected.

Binding

Y

R v Blackpool BC ex parte Red Cabs Taxis Ltd

LG(MP)A 1976 S48(2)(7), 51(2), S55(3), S77

[1994] RTR 402

IMPOSING CONDITIONS- Natural Justice requirements

If a Council imposed conditions on one group of traders at the behest of a rival group then the decision was flawed and should be challenged via the Magistrates Court. This is as it created an apparent injustice to one group ONLY.

Binding

Y

R v Brighton BC ex parte BUNCH DG and others

TPCA 1847, S37-38

CO/192/88

UNMET DEMAND

HELD:Demand related to demand for only those services that a hackney carriage could provide and must be a broad approach view over the whole week of work

Binding

Y

R v Brighton Corporation, ex parte Thomas Tilling Ltd

TPCA 1847, S37-38

Law Journal (KB) Vol.85, Pg 1552

DECISIONS-NATURAL JUSTICE

Councils may only have regard to pertinent matters & must not include extraneous matters in deciding upon fitness to grant licences.

Binding

N

R v Callender

Theft Act 1968

[1992] 3 All ER CA

EMPLOYED

A self employed contractor can be employed by via a contractual arrangement. If makes false claims as to status then can dishonestly obtain pecuniary advantage by deception

Binding

Y

R v Cambridge CC ex parte Simon Lane

TPCA 1847-1889

[1998]EWCA Civ 1202 13th July 1998

TRISHAW DEEMED TO BE OMNIBUS

HELD: That a trishaw service operated for hire on restricted routes let for hire at separate fares fell within the "omnibus" legislation of the TPCA 1889.

Binding

Y

R v Chief Constables of C & D ex parte A

Data Protection Act 1998

Times 07/11/00 (Judgement 25/10/2000)

DISCLOSURE OF SENSITIVE SUBJECT DATA

HELD: Police forces could in child access cases exchange non conviction information and could also pass this on to a Local Authority with a lawful interest without acting illegally.

Binding

Y

R v Clarke

Road Safety Act,1967 now the RTA 1988 as amended

[1969] 2 All ER 1008

REFUSING SPECIMEN ON REQUEST

Defines the rules re requesting & refusing specimens and also the relevant burden of proof

Binding

Y

R v Doncaster MBC ex parte Allen David Heath

LG[MP]A 1976, S55

CO/983/2000, 16th October 2000

OPERATE HACKNEY CARRIAGES

Held that no Operators licence is needed to use hackney carriages on prebooked school contract work [see distinguished case of Franklyn v Carter]

Binding

Y

R v Franklyn & Carter

LG(MP)A1976 S55

Crown Court Transcript

OPERATOR LICENCE

HELD:To operate Hackney Carriages as Private Hire Vehicles requires S55 Licence [Distinguished in R v Doncaster MBC]

Persuasive

Y

R v Governor of Brockhill Prison ex parte Evans (No 2)

HIGH COURT DECLARATIONS OF LAW

Times Law Reports [C.A.] 6-Jul-1998

RULE OF PRECEDENT-Stare Decisis

PRECEDENT:HELD: Where a Court of record decides the law then until over-ruled by a Higher Court that is the law and applies even to cases which commenced before that judgement was given ( i.e retrospective)

Binding

Y

R v Gowland-Wynn

CJPOA 1994, S34

[2001] The Times Law Report, 7th December, CA

ACCUSED FAILING TO COMMENT @ INTERVIEW

Held by LCJ Woolf that a judge could properly draw the jury's attention to the accused's silence if the silence clearly affected something that the defence later relied on-[new style PACE caution and the effect thereof]

Binding

Y

R v Great Western Trains Co Ltd ex parte Frederick

S45 TPCA 1847 & S76 PHA 1925

[1997] EWHC Admin 482 CO-1325-97

PLYING FOR HIRE ON RAILWAY PREMISES- RESTRICTIVE FRANCHISE SET UP

HELD: Rail company could set up franchise to sole provider if all other rules natural justice complied with so no unfulfilled expectations created by lack of consultation

Binding

Y

R v Great Yarmouth B.C. ex parte Sawyer

TPCA 1847, S37-38

[1989] RTR 297, C.A.

UNMET DEMAND FOR HCV's

1) If sure no unmet demand for the services of HCV's may refuse to issue more licences.2) If unsure of demand may derestrict & disregard demand;3) May also compare its area to other local authorities in reaching decision.

Binding

Y

R v Hyndburn B C ex parte Rauf & Kasim

LG(MP)A 1976, S48

CO/1799/91 + CO/1830/91 (see also DOT Circular 8/86 Para.26)

POLICY-MUST ALLOW CASE ON MERIT CONSIDERATION

Whilst a Council may have a policy they must not fetter their discretion absolutely & must consider each application on its merits

Binding

Y

R v Liverpool Corporation ex parte L. Taxi Fleet Operators Assoc.

TPCA 1847, S37-38

[1972] 2 QB, Pg299

UNMET DEMAND FOR HCV's

HELD: Court must consider rights of both current & future licence holders when considering plate issues.Natural Justice applies. See Shanahan & Hughes v Sefton

Binding

Y

R v Looseley, AG Ref No. 3 of 2000

TPCA 1847, S45 & PACE 1984, S78

[2001) Times Law Reports, October 29th, House of Lords

ENTRAPMENT

Held: That if an enforcement officer did no more than offer an opportunity to offend in the same way as a member of public could have then it could be lawful. Specifically approved the decision in Nottingham City Council v Amin [2000 WLR 1071]

Binding

Y

R v Lowe

S51 & S59 LG(MP)A 1976

[1997] EWCA Crim 697 No. 9700758 X4

FAILING TO NOTIFY OF MEDICAL CONDITION & THEREAFTER INVOLVED IN ACCIDENT

Held: An epileptic driver who drove against medical advice as a taxi driver was bound to receive a custodial sentence if death or serious injury resulted from his actions

Persuasive

Y

R v Mallett

Theft Act 1968,S17

[1978] 3 All ER 10

FALSE IN A MATERIAL PARTICULAR

If information was given about a person in order to obtain an advantage then if false it would be "false in a material particular". In certain cases evidence of why a fact was material might be required.

Binding

Y

R v Manchester C.C. ex parte King

LG(MP)A 1982, Sch4 para(9)1

[1991] LGR 696(QBD)

FEES-LIMITS ON RAISING AND DISPOSAL OF

FEES:HELD: Street trading fees could only be to cover costs and NOT for creation of income to Council over expenditure costs of enforcement etc. Wording of the LG(MP)A 1976 is as restrictive as that of the LG(MP)A 1982.

Binding

Y

R v Manchester C.C. ex parte Reid

LG(MP) A 1976, S47

[1989] RTR 285