Key Facts
- •James Craig & Partners (J Craig & Son) appealed a Deputy Traffic Commissioner's (DTC) refusal of their restricted operator licence application.
- •The DTC found the partnership unfit to hold a licence due to insufficient evidence of compliance with regulations and a lack of demonstrable knowledge of the regulatory regime.
- •The appellants' previous standard licence had been revoked in 2020 due to financial and compliance issues.
- •At the public inquiry, the appellants failed to provide evidence of satisfactory vehicle maintenance systems or driver's hours compliance, relying instead on their past record and assurances of future compliance.
- •The appeal focused on alleged unfairness, disproportionality, and bias in the DTC's decision.
Legal Principles
Operator licensing is based on trust, requiring evidence of knowledge, skill, and willingness to comply with the regulatory regime.
Joseph Formby t/a G&G Transport [2012] UKUT 239 (AAC)
The burden of proof rests on the applicant to demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements.
Arnold Transport & Sons Ltd v DOENI, NT/2013/82
The Upper Tribunal reviews the Traffic Commissioner's decision, not rehearing the evidence, but determining if the decision is objectively wrong.
Bradley Fold Travel Ltd & Peter Wright –v- Secretary of State for Transport [2010] EWCA Civ. 695
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The Upper Tribunal found the DTC's decision was not plainly wrong. The appellants failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate their knowledge of, and ability and willingness to comply with, the regulatory regime for operating heavy goods vehicles. Their past record, while positive in some aspects, did not outweigh the lack of evidence regarding current compliance.