Taxi Driver Online
http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

JD
http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=10736		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  charles007 [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:05 pm ]
Post subject:  JD
DO YOU HAVE THE CASE FROM STOCKPORT 2008 WERE THE COUNCIL WAS ORDERED TO ISSUE PLATES.
Author:  JD [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: JD
charles007 wrote:
DO YOU HAVE THE CASE FROM STOCKPORT 2008 WERE THE COUNCIL WAS ORDERED TO ISSUE PLATES.


The case is on here somewhere Charles and I do indeed have such a case. We try and put all relavent case law on TDO.

Regards

JD
Author:  JD [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:06 pm ]
Post subject: 
The case you are on about Charles was only ever published in case digest format because there was no actual case and I can't find it. lol

The case digest just reiterated the facts whereby the study of the MORI questionnaire did not amount to a measuring of demand, therefore Stockport were not in possesion of demand and had no legal right to refuse the licenses. That is it in a nutshell.

Regards

JD
Author:  captain cab [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
JD wrote:
The case you are on about Charles was only ever published in case digest format because there was no actual case and I can't find it. lol

The case digest just reiterated the facts whereby the study of the MORI questionnaire did not amount to a measuring of demand, therefore Stockport were not in possesion of demand and had no legal right to refuse the licenses. That is it in a nutshell.

Regards

JD


Thats going to be a bit out of character when he explains it to soda :wink:

regards

CC
Author:  JD [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
captain cab wrote:
JD wrote:
The case you are on about Charles was only ever published in case digest format because there was no actual case and I can't find it. lol

The case digest just reiterated the facts whereby the study of the MORI questionnaire did not amount to a measuring of demand, therefore Stockport were not in possesion of demand and had no legal right to refuse the licenses. That is it in a nutshell.

Regards

JD


Thats going to be a bit out of character when he explains it to soda :wink:

regards

CC


The only conclusion one can draw is that the case was decided in chambers probably after legal argument and the announcement in court of the reasons for allowing the appeal, was just a formality.

I think thats about the top and bottom of it.

Regards

JD
Author:  captain cab [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:26 pm ]
Post subject: 
JD wrote:

The only conclusion one can draw is that the case was decided in chambers probably after legal argument and the announcement in court of the reasons for allowing the appeal, was just a formality.

I think thats about the top and bottom of it.

Regards

JD


I thought i saw something on the stockport council website?

regards

CC
Author:  JD [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:29 pm ]
Post subject: 
captain cab wrote:


I thought i saw something on the stockport council website?

regards

CC


I'm sure sussex posted something about it as well.

Regards

JD
Author:  captain cab [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9968&highlight=mori
Author:  Sussex [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: JD
charles007 wrote:
DO YOU HAVE THE CASE FROM STOCKPORT 2008 WERE THE COUNCIL WAS ORDERED TO ISSUE PLATES.

This thread dealt with the outcome.

http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9968

But I think it was a case of no proper SUD evidence, thus no defence, thus plates must be issued.
Author:  JD [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: JD
Sussex wrote:
charles007 wrote:
DO YOU HAVE THE CASE FROM STOCKPORT 2008 WERE THE COUNCIL WAS ORDERED TO ISSUE PLATES.

This thread dealt with the outcome.

http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9968

But I think it was a case of no proper SUD evidence, thus no defence, thus plates must be issued.


I think thats all you are going to get on that matter charles.

Regards

JD
Author:  captain cab [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: JD
JD wrote:
I think thats all you are going to get on that matter charles.

Regards

JD


Have you taken note of the solicitor involved?

regards

CC
Author:  JD [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: JD
captain cab wrote:
Have you taken note of the solicitor involved?

regards

CC


And the Barrister.

Regards

JD
Author:  captain cab [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: JD
JD wrote:

And the Barrister.

Regards

JD


and who's perhaps going to act for the 'trade'?

Regards

CC
Author:  Sussex [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: JD
captain cab wrote:
and who's perhaps going to act for the 'trade'?

Define the trade? :?
Author:  captain cab [ Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: JD
Sussex wrote:
Define the trade? :?


Those brave fellows with Hansom carriages :wink:

CC
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/