The issue arose on a judicial review brought by Wakefield District Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Association against the decision the Wakefield Council’s licensing committee made to include the costs of taking enforcement action against licensed drivers in its fee for licensing vehicles (under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976). The council argued in the High Court that as a general principle of law, local authority licensing schemes are intended to be self-funding rather than dependent upon general funds.
At first instance HHJ Silver rejected this argument; declined to determine definitively whether or not the costs of enforcement action taken against drivers could be taken into account in the fixing of driver licence fees, and refused to accept that enforcement costs against licensed divers could be cross-subsidised by bringing such costs within the scope of the ‘control and supervision of hackney carriages and private hire vehicles’ in accordance with section 70(1)(c) of the Act.
The council appealed arguing that:
The Court of Appeal considered that the Act clearly provides for three types of licence (1) vehicle licences for hackney carriages and private hire vehicles; (2) drivers’ licences and (3) operators’ licences, and remarked that “The notion that the fee for one type of licence can reflect the costs involved in another, far from being implicit in Part 11 of the 1976 Act, is entirely contrary to its structure.”
As for (I) the Court of Appeal held that there is no such general principle and in response to the intervention of the Local Government Association on the issue, went on to say that limited resources and the potential adverse impact on enforcement cannot affect proper statutory interpretation; as for (II) that the cost of driver enforcement action is recoverable under section 53, but regardless of the correct interpretation of the section, such costs cannot be taken into account in fixing vehicle licence fees; and as for (III) it cannot have been the intention of parliament to authorise something “entirely alien” to the structure of Part 11 of the Act, which on its face has a “comprehensive, self-contained regime for each category of licence”.
Interestingly the Court of Appeal further considered that, contrary to the argument of the council and without having heard the point argued, the costs of taking enforcement action against (licensed) drivers can be included in the drivers’ licence fee in accordance with section 53(2) which provides for the recovery of fees for the grant of drivers’ licences as are considered ‘reasonable with a view to recovering the costs of issue and administration’. However, this is not considered to extend to unlicensed drivers against whom the recovery of enforcement costs is likely to remain controversial until such time as the point is argued and authoritatively determined.
This judgement is likely to add to the frustration and argument of those long since seeking the wholesale reform of the entire taxi licensing regime, in the meantime, local authorities may wish to:
Please contact Matt Marsh.
Next in our series of ebriefings on the Government’s Green Paper: Transforming public procurement; looking at the Chapter 4 proposal to change the basis of contract awards.
The Academies Financial Handbook is updated annually by the Department for Education and the Education and Skills Funding Agency; it contains a number of governance requirements for academy trusts.
Supreme Court publishes key decision for those working in the UK’s gig economy.
The 'Chocolate Snowman Appeal' is an amazing initiative that Anthony Collins Solicitors' (ACS) employees take part in every year.
The Building Safety Bill (the Bill) is said to be the most significant and wide-ranging change to the regulatory environment for higher risk building (HRBs) for over 45 years.
On 4 November 2020, the Restriction of Public Exit Payments Regulations 2020 (the Regulations) came into force; exit payments for the public sector were capped at £95,000.
The case was brought by the Official Receiver who sought disqualification orders under section 6 of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 (CDDA 1986) against the seven trustees of Kids Company and its CEO. It illustrates well the tension between the role of a fulltime paid CEO of a large charity and the role of its board as voluntary trustees/directors.
At the end of 2020, The Charity Governance Code was updated or 'refreshed' as it is termed on its website.
Anthony Collins Solicitors is today (Thursday 11 February) revealing the scale of its social impact during 2020.
In their first podcast of this series, current and future trainees will discuss their journey and route to securing a training contract at Anthony Collins Solicitors.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.