captain cab wrote:
In my judgment, once the position is reached where nothing further remains to be agreed between the driver and the customer within the unlicensed area, the conclusion is inescapable that the hiring took place in the area where these defendants were licensed. The inevitable consequence of that, as it seems to me, is that the cabs in the instant case were not permitted to be hired in the licensed area. The hiring had already taken place. It follows that the answer to the first question posed by the Stipendiary Magistrate, namely:
"Whether, notwithstanding any prior booking arrangement or hiring agreement, the licensed cab driver for the purposes of Paragraph 31 of the London Cab Order 1934 permits his cab to be hired at the time and place at which he physically picks "up the hirer?"
is "No"; and, as to the second question, namely:
"Was I correct in law, on the agreed facts, in dismissing the informations?"
the answer is "Yes". Of course the offences in the informations laid in relation to aiding and abetting against the first Respondents must, of course, fail with the informations laid against the other Respondents.
So the drivers in this case were found innocent because they accepted the pre booking whilst they were still in their licensed area.
In effect as soon as they accepted the job they were 'hired'
CC
Well, what else do you glean from the case? What about the person taking the booking?
I think we should take one point at a time, You no doubt realise that you don't need a license to take bookings for a hackney carriage, and this case points out you can use a licensed driver in any authority even though you yourself or the hirer are not in that authority.
So as an example, I could take a booking in area A and give it to a licensed hackney driver in area B or area C or D or whatever?
Now then, what if I took a booking in area A and gave it to a hackney driver licensed in area B but when he took the job he was in area C?
The circumstance in this case meant the judge only had to determine one situation and that was whether a person sat in his own licensed area could take a booking from an office situated in another area.
The judge didn't need to answer the question about the driver being licensed in the area where the hire was to take place because the driver was in his own area when he took the job.
All that this case proved and I might say that any simpleton could have deduced the same, was that the driver wasn't plying for hire in the area where the job was booked when he took the job in his own area. Those were the circumstances and the court couldn't rule or make up any other circumstances on information that wasn't before them?
If the driver had admitted being outside his own area and in the Green area when he took the job, then the judge would have had to make a decision based on that circumstance? He would also have had to address the legal definition of plying for hire, as against the legal definition of private hire?
You may also wonder why in all this time there has never been another case brought to test the legality of taking a booking while in the green zone when licensed in the Yellow zone? Or are we to assume that Yellow badge drivers are always in their own zone when they take a job in the Green zone?
Perhaps we can clear these points up first before we move on to the finer points?
Regards
JD
Login
Register
FAQ
