|
R. (on the application of Royden) v Wirral MBCQueen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
18 October 2002
Consultation; Licences; Premiums; Protection of property; Taxis
Summary: licences; taxis; removal of restriction on number of hackney carriage licences; process of consultation.
Proprietors of hackney carriages licensed by the local authority, sought judicial review of a decision by the local authority to remove the pre existing limit on the number of vehicles licensed as hackney carriages. Royden contended that there had been no proper consultation. Royden argued that there had been an interference with their property in breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 Sch.1 Part I Art.1 . The local authority argued that there was no obligation under the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 to have a demand survey when deciding to lift a restriction on the number of hackney carriage vehicle licences.
Held, refusing the application for judicial review, that there had been a sufficient process of consultation, R. v North and East Devon HA Ex p. Coughlan [2001] Q.B. 213 applied. Subject to any relevant human rights considerations, as a matter of law the local authority was entitled under the 1847 Act to derestrict the number of hackney carriage vehicle licences issued and that no prior survey of demand was required by s.37 before any such decision was taken, R. v Great Yarmouth BC Ex p. Sawyer [1989] R.T.R. 297 applied. Article 1 did not apply so as to protect the premium value of the hackney carriage vehicle licences.
In circumstances where there had not been a withdrawal of a licence, no deprivation and no control of use, relevant guidance was provided by Pudas v Sweden (A/125) (1988) 10 E.H.R.R. 380 and Zacher v Germany (30032/96) (1996) 22 E.H.R.R. CD136. Changes in the law which could affect property values, or the value of a business, could not usually be impugned under Art.1 purely on the grounds that a change in the law had caused a diminution in value. It was unlikely that the authors of the Convention intended that a scarcity value arising from operation of law constituted property protected under Art.1. Pudas and Zacher considered. [b]
Judge: Sir Christopher Bellamy, Q.C.
Counsel: For R: Richard Clayton Q.C. For the local authority: Richard Humphreys
Solicitor: For R: Bindman & Partners. For the local authority: Sharpe Pritchard
Significant Cases CitedPudas v Sweden (A/125)
(1988) 10 E.H.R.R. 380; Times, November 13, 1987; (ECHR)
R. v Great Yarmouth BC Ex p. Sawyer
[1989] R.T.R. 297; 86 L.G.R. 617; (1987) 151 L.G. Rev. 869; (CA (Civ Div))
R. v North and East Devon HA Ex p. Coughlan
[2001] Q.B. 213; [2000] 2 W.L.R. 622; [2000] 3 All E.R. 850; (2000) 2 L.G.L.R. 1; [1999] B.L.G.R. 703; (1999) 2 C.C.L. Rep. 285; [1999] Lloyd's Rep. Med. 306; (2000) 51 B.M.L.R. 1; [1999] C.O.D. 340; (1999) 96(31) L.S.G. 39; (1999) 143 S.J.L.B. 213; Times, July 20, 1999; Independent, July 20, 1999; (CA (Civ Div))
Zacher v Germany (30032/96)
(1996) 22 E.H.R.R. CD136; (Eur Comm HR)
Legislation CitedHuman Rights Act 1998 (c.42) s.2(1)
Human Rights Act 1998 (c.42) s.3
Human Rights Act 1998 (c.42) s.6(1)
Human Rights Act 1998 Sch.1
Human Rights Act 1998 Sch.1 Part I Art.1
Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (c.57) s.60(1)
Local Government Act 1999 (c.27)
Town Police Clauses Act 1847 (c.89)
Town Police Clauses Act 1847 (c.89) s.37
Town Police Clauses Act 1847 (c.89) s.43
Transport Act 1985 (c.67) s.16
Journal ArticlesLicensing
Legitimate expectation; Licences; Local authorities powers and duties; Taxis.
J.L.G.L. 2003, 6(1), D7-8
________________________
|
Login
Register
FAQ
