Taxi Driver Online

The line between Law and Fact is quite clearly distinguishable because one relates to the legal requirement of administering a hearing within the confines of a legal structure and that decisions are made within the ambit of the law granted by parliament. On the other hand a finding of fact can be arrived at by only studying the evidence available at the time. However a finding of fact based on evidence that does not support the finding could reasonably be classed as wholly unreasonable. Finding a fact which is unsupported by the evidence is not only unreasonable by nature it is without doubt an error in law.

Therefore those people who apply for licenses in restricted areas and especially those in Edinburgh should note that when confronted by evidence which you believe to be incorrect or bias then if you are able to discredit that evidence then you stand a reasonable chance of obtaining a result. Especially if there was no independent evidence available which formed the basis of the original decision?

_________________________

The distinction between law and fact.

The distinction between what will be treated as a question of law and what will be treated as a question of fact is one of importance. In general, where a body makes an error of law in reaching a decision, it will act without jurisdiction or power, and the court may quash that decision on an application for judicial review. By contrast the court will generally not intervene on the ground that a body has reached an erroneous finding of fact unless the finding is manifestly unreasonable or was otherwise reached through an error of law.

There is often difficulty in deciding whether a question should be classified as one of law or as one of fact (or fact and degree). Determination of the primary facts is not a matter of law, but to make a finding unsupported by any evidence is an error of law. Drawing inferences from the facts as found, and in particular determining whether the primary or secondary facts fall within the ambit of a statutory description, are potentially classifiable as questions of law, as questions of fact, or as questions of mixed law and fact. The method of classification may be important, for judicial review of findings of law may entail an independent determination of the matter already decided, whereas a review of findings of fact is likely to be more limited. If the question is one which only a trained lawyer can be expected to decide correctly, there is a presumption that it will be categorised as one of law. Otherwise the question is usually treated as one of mixed law and fact, so that the range of meanings that can reasonably be ascribed to a statutory expression is a question of law; but whether the facts as found fall within the ambit of that expression will be held to be a question of fact, on which the decision of the competent authority will not be disturbed unless it is perverse (or is such that no reasonable authority properly instructed in the law could have arrived at it), or is erroneous because a wrong legal approach has been adopted.

A court will generally be reluctant to disturb the findings of a tribunal with specialised knowledge of technical subject matter, irrespective of whether these findings be classified as law or fact.
___________________

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