Sussex wrote:
ANGRY TAXI DRIVERS GO TO COURT OVER LICENCE ROW
Taxi drivers who are furious at a decision by Bath and North East Somerset Council to "withhold" their hackney carriage licences while a survey of their service is carried out took their case to court yesterday. The court heard that the nine men were frustrated they had been told by the council they would have to wait until September before they would find out whether they would receive their licences.
The council has deferred issuing licences until the results of a survey into the demand for taxis in Bath is completed.
Yesterday the drivers agreed to their appeal being adjourned until the review was completed. But they warned they could be back at the court if they were not satisfied with the decisions made by the council following the review.
The appellants include John O'Neill, of Broadmoor Lane, Geoff Seymour, of Lansdown View, Aaron Isaac, of Old Fosse Road and Paul Smith, of Fairfield Avenue, Fairfield Park. Their fellow appellants are Brian Hemmings, of College Road, Trowbridge, Vivian Stokes, of Gloucester Road, Trowbridge, Walter Wood, of Cleveland Gardens, Trowbridge, Gary Sharpe, of Clifton Close, Chippenham, and Douglas Johnson, of Lowbourne, Melksham.
Explaining the case, Allan Fuller, prosecuting, said: "The appellants are appealing against a decision from B &NES on the granting of hackney carriage proprietors' licences. The council has deferred the decision, which is said to amount to a withholding. It's agreed that the best way forward is to allow a survey that was instigated some months ago, and should be completed within a month, to take place.
"Consideration will take place in September. After that, any further grievances can be aired in this court, or in the event that the parties are happy, it could be dealt with administratively."
Judge Simon Darwall-Smith said: "If and when the survey is done in September, presumably those applications can be considered in the normal way by the licensing committee."
The judge heard that the council's executive would decide if there was a need for the taxis. Mr Fuller said the men were all first in line for consideration. He said: "It may be that the outcome of the survey is favourable. If not we can resurrect proceedings."
Prior to yesterday's court hearing, the taxi drivers had said they were angry because in March they had each paid £307 to the council for a licence. The claimed the council was holding on to the money without giving them licences.
This case follows the classic example of current case law, which in England and Wales allows a council to defer applicants for a short period of time. The only difference in this case seems to be that the council has taken money from the applicants who in turn must have had an expectation of being granted a license. Whether or not these applicants were promised a license I don't know but if they had and they have it in writing then the council may be on a sticky wicket.
If as I assume the council did not offer licenses to these applicants then if the survey shows no unmet demand (and the way surveys are manipulated I assume it will), then the council need not issue any new licenses.
I'm afraid that is the law as it stands until such time it is changed.
Regards
JD