Key Facts
- •Mrs. Gwendoline Joyce Greenwood and Mr. David Greenwood (in partnership) applied for a standard operator's licence.
- •The application was refused by the Traffic Commissioner (TC) due to insufficient financial information.
- •The provided bank statements were for a dissolved previous partnership, failing to meet the requirements of s13D (sufficient financial resources).
- •The applicants live on a hill farm and needed the license primarily for transporting animals.
- •The applicants missed the deadline to submit the correct financial information, partly due to the postal strike and difficulties accessing banking services.
- •The appeal argued that the refusal was due to incorrect bank details initially submitted, and the delay was caused by factors beyond their control.
Legal Principles
The TC must refuse a licence application if requirements under s13(1) are not met (s13(5)).
Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995
On licence applications, the TC must consider whether s13D (sufficient financial resources) is satisfied (s13(1)(b), s13(2)(b)).
Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995
s13A(2)(c) (financial standing) is relevant to licence application decisions.
Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995
The Upper Tribunal's task is to determine whether the TC's decision was objectively wrong; it cannot consider circumstances not existing at the time of the determination.
Bradley Fold Travel & anor v Secretary of State for Transport [2010] EWCA Civ 695
The TC could have used Regulation 31(3) and 31(4) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Regulations 1995 to suspend the old licence and treat the new partnership as its holder.
Ian Phillips (trading as T and R Phillips Haulage) [2016] UKUT 156 (AAC)
An applicant can appeal to the Upper Tribunal against a licence refusal (s37(1)).
Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The appellants failed to provide the required financial information within the given timeframe. While their circumstances were unfortunate, the TC's decision was not plainly wrong.