Taxi Driver Online

Interesting case.

R (on the application of HUME) v CARMARTHEN MAGISTRATES' COURT (2008)

QBD (Admin) (Cranston J) 19/11/2008

ROAD TRAFFIC

DISCRETIONARY POWERS : DRIVING LICENCES : DRIVING TESTS : FITNESS TO DRIVE : REVOCATION : VOCATIONAL LICENCES : REVOCATION OF LICENCE AND IMPOSITION OF DRIVING TEST REQUIREMENT : POWER OF APPELLATE COURT TO SPLIT SANCTIONS : s.119 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1988 : s.115(b) ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1988 : s.119(3) ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1988

A magistrates' court in considering an appeal under the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.119 against a decision to revoke a motorist's large vehicle licence and/or passenger carrying licence, on the basis that the motorist was unfit to hold the licences, coupled with a requirement for the motorist to undertake the appropriate driving test for those licences, only had the power to allow or dismiss both sanctions as the sanctions could not be properly separated under the Act.

The claimant motorist (H) applied for judicial review of a decision of the defendant magistrates' court that required him to retake the appropriate driving test for a large vehicle licence and/or a passenger carrying licence. H had been convicted of an offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent.

The offence occurred through an incident of "road rage" whereby H drove his large vehicle into another driver. H was sentenced to a term of imprisonment and was disqualified from driving. After his release from custody, H successfully applied to the DVLA for the return of his licence. In light of H's conviction the Secretary of State for Transport referred the question of H's fitness to hold a large vehicle licence and/or passenger carrying licence to the Deputy Traffic Commissioner for Wales. The commissioner decided that H was not a fit and proper person to hold a vocational licence and that he should be disqualified from holding a licence with large vehicle and/or passenger entitlements for a period of three years.

H appealed against that decision to the magistrates' court under the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.119. The magistrates' court partially allowed H's appeal by revoking the three-year disqualification having found him to be a fit and proper person to hold a licence. However, the magistrates' court decided that H ought to retake the appropriate driving test for a large vehicle licence and/or a passenger carrying licence. H contended that the magistrates' court only had the power under s.119 of the Act to allow or refuse his appeal in its entirety.

HELD: Revocation or suspension of a licence was mandatory under s.115(b) of the Act where a motorist's conduct made him unfit to hold such a licence. It was further provided by s.117 of the Act that the secretary of state could in pursuance of s.115(b) require a motorist whose large vehicle licence and/or passenger carrying licence had been revoked to retake the test appropriate for those licences. Therefore, the power to suspend or revoke a motorist's licence was coupled with the power to order a motorist to undertake a retest.

Accordingly, on an appeal under s.119 if a magistrates' court allowed an appeal in relation to one sanction it had to allow the appeal in relation to the other. Moreover whilst s.119(3) of the Act provided that the magistrates' court could make any order that it thought fit that did not mean that the magistrates' court had a greater discretion than the commissioner or the secretary of state, Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions v Elsy (2000) 164 JP 61 QBD applied.

Application granted
___________________________