CROSS-BORDER PROBLEM The right to roam?
Philip Kolvin KC established the concept of “The right to roam” in Delta v Knowsley 2018:
https://shorturl.at/7D7yf
which effectively suggested that a driver licensed in one given area could work anywhere. In my view, this flies in the face of both section 35 Plymouth Act 1975 and section 75 (1) (a) Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976. It is worth noting that no case law suggesting that it is perfectly legal to wait to receive bookings in another area from the one in which a driver and vehicle may be licensed, has ever clarified or even mentioned these two sections of legislation. Moreover, these sections are still ‘live’ and on the Statute. As far as I and others are concerned, in matters of law, the wrong questions have been asked regarding cross-border working.
We have received answers to the question:
“Is it lawful for a driver of a private hire vehicle to wait to receive work while outside of their licensing area?”
from the likes of James Button and Philip Kolvin KC, and we know that their answer is an unequivocal: “yes.” However, the following question:
“What restriction or limitation in both the saving clauses of section 35 of the Plymouth Act 1975 and section 75 (1) (a) of the LGMPA 1976, is outlined on bringing passengers or goods into the City of Plymouth or any Controlled District, respectively?”
has never been asked or formally tested in court.
I did ask our Jim during one of the seminars at last year’s PHTM EXPO at Milton Keynes what he thought of section 75 (1) (a) LGMPA 1976. His stated opinion was that it was irrelevant to the modern age and that trying to interpret the intention of Parliament over 40 years ago was a pointless exercise, or words to that effect. What he did not say, was that it was no longer in force, for that would be untrue.
Spot the difference! Plymouth Act 1975, section 35 (1):
(1) Nothing in this Part of this Act shall— apply to a vehicle used for bringing passengers or goods within the city in pursuance of a contract for the hire of the vehicle made outside the city if the vehicle is not made available for hire within the city;
PHTM APRIL 2025
Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, section 75 (1) (a):
(1) Nothing in this Part of this Act shall— (a) apply to a vehicle used for bringing passengers or goods within a controlled district in pursuance of a contract for the hire of the vehicle made outside the district if the vehicle is not made available for hire within the district;
(b) F50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
https://shorturl.at/0OzXB Let’s play a game of spot the difference, shall we?
In the Plymouth Act, “the city” clearly refers to the area of the city of Plymouth.
In the 1976 Act, a “controlled district” is the area of any local council to have adopted this Act after 1976. Thus, the words, “controlled district” can be substituted by the name of said district, borough or city other than Plymouth.
Example:
(1) Nothing in this Part of this Act shall— (a) apply to a vehicle used for bringing passengers or goods within Stafford Borough in pursuance of a contract for the hire of the vehicle made outside Stafford Borough if the vehicle is not made available for hire within Stafford Borough;
The meaning of the above two sections is therefore identical.
You may bring passengers or goods into Stafford Borough (or any other controlled district) provided the vehicle is not made available to be hired in Stafford Borough. ‘Hired’ would include that of being booked through an operator. It is worth noting that every district, borough and city in England and Wales has adopted the Act of 1976, with the exception of London and Plymouth, of course, as these have their own legislation, as does Scotland.
You will, however, note that section 75 (1) (b) has seemingly disappeared and has been replaced by a link [F50] and a series of dots ..... denoting a deletion. This is to show that 75 (1) (b) was repealed by the passage of the Road Safety Act 2006. Other amendments to the 76 Act have taken place with the passage of the Deregulation Act 2015 and the Immigration Act 2016.
Section 75 (1) (a) has survived all these amendments and is therefore still in force.
7
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86
