TAXI LAW EXPLAINED
For example, when a district authority’s accounts showed a surplus in taxi and/or private hire fee income, that surplus must be factored in. Where accounts show a deficit, this too can be factored in but, unlike a surplus, a deficit can be ignored.
It is worth noting however that in licensing authority accounting timescales, adjusting fees according to surplus/deficit will hap- pen on a three yearly cycle because taxi and private hire licensing fee setting hap- pens before the financial year end.
NO CROSS SUBSIDIES
Cross subsidisation is the practice of charging higher fees to one group (i.e. driver’s licences) to subsidise lower prices for another group (i.e. vehicles licences). The Court of Appeal ruling in the Wake- field case went further to say that driver, vehicle and operator licensing are separate regimes and the costs of these should be calculated entirely separately from each other to avoid cross subsidisation.
Master of the Rolls, King LJ and Lavender J said at paragraphs 39 and 40:
“What is apparent from those provisions of Part II, read where appropriate with the 1847 Act, is that each of the three types of licence – vehicle, operator and driver - has a comprehensive and self-contained statu- tory regime, which addresses grant, terms, suspension, revocation and fee. There is no cross-referencing in relation to any of those matters. The notion that the fee for one type of licence can reflect the costs involved in another, far from being implicit in Part II of the 1976 Act, is entirely contrary to its structure.
“What is also apparent, on the other hand, is the similarity in the statutory treatment of some aspects of the three different types of licence. In particular the qualify- ing requirements for the grant of each licence involve matters which will be rele- vant throughout the duration of the licence, whether they be as to design, appearance, mechanical condition, safety, comfort and the existence of a valid policy of insurance in the case of a vehicle licence, or as to the person being a fit and proper person and not disqualified by rea- son of immigration status in the case of a driver’s licence and an operator’s licence.
The continuing relevance of at least some of those matters throughout the duration of each type of licence is also reflected in the provisions for suspension and revoca-
JANUARY 2020
The Civil Procedure Rules states that Judi- cial Review proceedings must be filed promptly but in any event not later than three months after the grounds to make the claim first arose. There are therefore strict timescales in place.
Furthermore, there are specific grounds for seeking a Judicial Review (briefly stat- ed as):
tion. The fact that, in the case of each type of licence, the district council can attach such conditions as they consider reason- ably necessary indicates that Parliament envisaged that there would be additional requirements to be observed as condi- tions of the licence after its grant.
Plainly, in all those cases the district coun- cil would need to monitor compliance with the various requirements and condi- tions on the basis of which the licence was granted and was to be permitted to sub- sist until it came to an end or was suspended or revoked. That would inevitably involve, in the case of each cat- egory of licence, expense on the part of the district council beyond the cost of the original grant of the licence.”
As I previously explained, a general legal principle is that licensing authorities have no powers beyond those which statute has given them. Therefore in respect of setting and adopting hackney carriage and pri- vate hire licensing fees,
authorities are bound by the specific heads of recovery as prescribed in legisla- tion as confirmed in the Wakefield case.
CHALLENGE
As with any decision made by a licensing authority, it is subject to legal challenge. As I have previously mentioned in this arti- cle, there has been a substantial amount of litigation around fees and charges for taxi and private hire licensing. Whilst a Judicial Review may seem the most obvious means of challenge, a complaint to the local audi- tor can be as effective without the substantial costs attached to Judicial Review proceedings.
JUDICIAL REVIEW
A decision to set fees in respect of taxi and private hire licensing taken by a district council is challengeable in the High Court by way ofJudicial Review. There are specific rules that must be followed when seeking a Judicial Review of such a decision.
1. Illegality – failure to follow the law properly
2. Irrationality – demonstrably unreason- able as to constitute ‘irrationality’
3. Procedural impropriety/unfairness – act so unfairly that it amounts to an abuse of power
The High Court can, in finding the action of a district council to be unlawful:
1. Quash the decision and requiring the council to re-take the decision;
2. Making a declaration; and/or 3. Award damages.
LOCAL AUDITOR
An alternative means of challenging fees set by a district authority is through a complaint to the Local Auditor (previously District Auditor).
licensing
Local Auditors are people officially appointed to carry out the audit of local government and health bodies’ financial arrangements and this will also therefore include licensing fees as these form part of a district council’s accounts.
Generally speaking, there is a period of 30 days after the setting of fees where licence holders can inspect and object to the fees set. The objection should relate to legally relevant matters such as not complying with legislative requirements, incorrect charging and calculations etc. If the district authority’s response is unsat- isfactory, a complaint to the appointed local auditor can be made in writing indi- cating which item(s) in the accounts are being objected to and why they are unlawful.
Local auditors have a range of statutory powers attributed to them including the ability to apply to the High Court for a statutory declaration that an item, or items, of account is against the law.
In such circumstances, the local auditor can require the district council to act to rectify and remedy the error.
83
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 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96
