Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sun Oct 05, 2025 10:23 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Fife Council v Watters
PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:53 pm
Posts: 10381
If anyone knows what the good reason for an extension of time amounted to in this instance, I would be most grateful?
_____________________________

Fife Council v Watters Citation information only

2006 SLT (Sh Ct) 39
Court: Sh Ct

Judgment Date: 27/02/2006

Catchwords & Digest


CRIMINAL LAW, EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE - SHERIFF COURT – PURSUERS REQUIRED TO REACH DECISION FOR LICENCE APPLICATION WITHIN SIX MONTHS – SUMMARY APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME PERIOD – SUMMARY APPLICATION LODGED BEFORE BUT SERVED AFTER EXPIRY OF SIX MONTH PERIOD – WHETHER APPLICATION MADE WHEN LODGED

In their capacity as licensing authority for Fife, the pursuers were required to consider the defender's application for renewal of a taxi driver's licence, which was lodged on 17 January 2005. By virtue of s 3(1) of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, the pursuers required to reach a final decision on that application within a period of six months. The last date for reaching a decision was therefore 17 July 2005. For good reason, they were unable to reach a decision by that date and consequently they lodged the instant summary application in terms of s 3(2), seeking a six month extension of that period.

The summary application was lodged with the sheriff clerk's office on 1 July 2005, warranted on 4 July 2005 and served on 20 July 2005. Thus, it was lodged before, but served after, the expiry of the six month period. The sole issue between the parties was that of competency, the parties having tendered a joint minute of admissions which was to the effect that if the application was held to be competent, it was agreed that there was good reason for extending the period within which a decision required to be reached, and that the application would then fall to be granted. In particular, the issue in dispute was whether the application was made within the six month period, that was, whether it was made when it was lodged or when it was served.

Held – The application would be granted. In the instant case, there was an application to the court within six months, and that application occurred when it was lodged. Accordingly, the application would be granted.
______________________--


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group