Taxi Driver Online

And you point caller is?

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/WHE0111.html

In any event, the petitioner had a right to be heard before the board on her application, and took full advantage of that right. Further, she has a right of appeal. In these circumstances I am satisfied that there were sufficient safeguards in place to avoid any abuse of power on the part of the respondents in respect of the application of their policy and that this submission therefore also fails.

http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/2001/142.html

Article 6 of the Convention

The relevant provisions founded upon by the petitioners are as follows:

"6.1 In determination of his civil rights or obligations of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law...

3 Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights...

(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him".

[15] Counsel for the petitioners submitted that following Tre Traktorer Akitebolag v Sweden (1989) 13 EHRR 309, the removal of a licence such as with which this case was concerned in the sense that the application had been refused, involved a civil right which brought Article 6 into play. On that basis it was submitted that a fair hearing would involve equality of arms between the parties (Dombo Beheer v Netherlands (1993) 18 EHRR 213) and furthermore require compliance with Article 6(3)(d). It was submitted that although that paragraph bore to apply only to criminal cases, they were applicable to disciplinary proceedings and generally as part of the equation in relation to quality of rights (Albert and Le Compte v Belgium (1982) 5 EHRR 533 and Van Mechelen and others v Netherlands (1997) 25 EHRR 647.

[16] The response of the respondents was similar to that in relation to the common law provision save it was submitted that the Board must not be regarded as a court or tribunal and therefore not subject to Article 6(3)(d) which in any event should not be extended beyond the concept of a court case properly regarded as such. The Dombo case did not set much in the way of a different test from a common law position and the same factors therefore applied in relation to the consideration of the issues raised by Article 6.

[17] For the purposes of the argument I am prepared to accept that Article 6 applies generally in the context of a hearing of this type ie a Licensing Board albeit it is administrative and it is not in my opinion correct to regard the Board as exercising the functions of a tribunal. Having said that however, I do not consider the test to be required under the Convention raises any different issues, certainly in this case, on the question of fairness and the equality of arms from those focused by the common law of Scotland. For precisely the same reasons that I already applied in relation to the common law test I do not consider any breach of Article 6 of the Convention has been established in respect of the way that the proceedings were handled.

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

What is the origin of this CC?

And it would mean that there should be a Human Rights audit trail for every signature by a Chief Official.

Yes?

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

Its from the Edinburgh Council website; I'll post the link;

https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/754/equalities_diversity_and_human_rights_scheme_equalities_impact_assessment_guidance

I dont know the answer to your question, but the question is a good one.

I would presume that before a report goes to a committee a head of department must approve the report......and at that point consider human rights?

CC

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

Thanks for two interesting submissions.

On first reading CC both the cases you have brought forward relate to licence applications, specifically extensions to them.

The matter of conducting a hearing where punishment is handed down is entirely a different prospect.

The Sheriff in Dumfries cited yhe use of suspension of licence as "illogical". And so it is, because the council is operating as a judicial rather than a quasi judicial body.

With no precedent, benchmarks or standards in force. In effect a kangaroo court.

This is a different kettle of fish.

I would also point out that Judicial review is not necessarily the end of a Human Rights proceeding. That belongs to the European Court of Justice.

I will go over them in more detail and get back to you.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

The point I was trying to make was that the council have a procedure to follow, provided it follows the procedure it is within the human rights of the defendant.

I agree, the use of suspension is illogical, as a person is either fit and proper or not fit and proper......how will a two week suspension change a persons fitness and propriety? The answer is it obviously cannot.

However, that being stated, the person in question hasn't appeared in front of any committee yet, and perhaps wont, it is therefore difficult to say the council are wrong when they haven't done anything !

CC

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

As usual, Garry,your way ahead of yourself. war has not even been declared, iit's only your own ego that makes you think you're so important.

If you remember ALL complaints are required to be sent to Peter Lang who forwards them to the Cab Inspector for him to investigate if criminality is involved.

Frank is legally entitled to ask you to attend for interview per your licence conditions.

Compliance with Authorised Officer
142
The driver of a taxi shall not obstruct the Authorised Officer in the performance of any of the Authorised Officer’s duties under these conditions.
143
The driver of a taxi shall comply with all the instructions or directions of the Authorised Officer in relation to these conditions and shall give all information reasonably required in the discharge of the duties of the Authorised Officer.

Without knowing the nature of the complaint, how can you decide it is frivolous?

The simple thing would be to go, listen, then give your opinion and leave if you so desire. Rather than being subservient by going, you are being stupid by not going.

Bend over and take it like the gayer you are.

_________________
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Believe me, don't get Mercury X2

the cab inspector is just the unaccountable patsy in the process

put in place by the council as a buffer between the license holder and the council.

he has bugger all to do with the council so they cant be held accountable for his actions or comments.

council off the hook

if he is found of any wrong doing then you complain to the police not the council.
and as the police investigate themselves,there off the hook.

thats why we shouldn't have a police cab inspector
police checks yes,mot yes
but none of this fascist crap from a failed copper.


take the barstewards in to court its about time this [edited by admin] stopped

who Gives a F*ck ?

_________________
Glasgow's Finest

John Blane told me the nature of the alleged incident, the complaint was about a driving incident. And I know for a fact, there was no incident regarding my driving. This was a vexatious malicious complaint with no foundation whatsoever.

I denied all knowledge of the alleged incident apart from being in the vicinity at the time.

Frank wanted to interview me about the allegation, and I chose not to accept his invitation stating that, I won't speak to a frivolous, malicious, unfounded unsubstantiated allegation, which is my right. You do still have the right of silence even when you are a taxi driver, and I chose to exercise that right.

I wouldn't trust Frank Smith or that council as far as I could throw them.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

thats what we thought about your solar powered cars.

Here's something to think about Swannee, what happened to the complaint being properly investigated by the police through the statutory process? There was no interview, no caution and no day in court. I was never charged and no investigation ever took place. The complaint never even went via the council. It went straight to the Cab Inspector as a licensing matter, in less than four hours, after the alleged incident was supposed to have happened. Frank then attempted to coerce me into an interview by threatening me with, “if I did not attend his interview”, I would be put before the council. Under these circumstances, I would have to be off of my head to speak to a complaint with this nut job. I think Frank seen my name and took a rush of blood to the head.

Frank jumped the gun with what was nothing more than malicious tittle tattle. In Frank's world at least, there appears to be no Equality before the Law, and their procedures seem to be all over the place.


btw Swannee, you should read your licensing conditions again. I really don't see how they apply in my case.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

Especially in Scotland.

_________________
IDFIMH

Now if you lot did cabs powered by bucky.....you'd be quids in.

CC

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