Qasim Saleem t/a MS Foods Ltd
[2024] UKUT 169 (AAC)
LKW Trans Ltd
6 March 2023
[2023] UKUT 59 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal
A trucking company's licence was wrongly taken away because the boss was in Romania helping his sick son and didn't tell the transport authorities properly. A court decided this wasn't fair, so the licence is back, and there will be a new hearing.
Key Facts
- •LKW Trans Ltd's operator's licence was revoked by the Deputy Traffic Commissioner (DTC) for the East of England due to failure to provide satisfactory evidence of driver employment regularisation and non-attendance at a public inquiry.
- •A previous inquiry resulted in a 28-day licence suspension with a condition to employ drivers on a PAYE basis from August 1, 2022.
- •The company submitted evidence of PAYE payments, but the DTC deemed it insufficient.
- •A reconvened inquiry on August 31, 2022, proceeded in the company's absence, leading to licence revocation.
- •The company's director, Mr. Hudescu, claimed he was in Romania due to his son's injury, but this was not initially communicated effectively to the OTC.
Legal Principles
Mandatory revocation of a standard licence if the licence holder no longer meets the requirements of section 13A(2) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995, including good repute.
Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995, section 27(1)(a)
The Traffic Commissioner must be satisfied of the grounds for revocation; the burden is not on the licence holder to disprove them.
Muck It Ltd and Others v. Secretary of State for Transport (2005) EWCA Civ 1124
Revocation must be proportionate; the question is whether the conduct is so serious that the operator ought to be put out of business.
Bryan Haulage (No.2) 2002/217
Consider the likelihood of future compliance with the licensing regime when deciding on proportionality.
Priority Freight 2009/225
The Upper Tribunal has full jurisdiction to hear and determine matters of law and fact, but it is not required to rehear all evidence.
Transport Act 1985, Schedule 4, paragraph 17; Bradley Fold Travel Ltd & Anor v Secretary of State for Transport [2010] EWCA Civ 695
To admit fresh evidence on appeal, it must be shown that it could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence, it would probably influence the result, and it is apparently credible.
Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The DTC's decision to revoke the licence in the appellant's absence was plainly wrong due to inaccurate information and a denial of natural justice. The DTC's decision was based on an incomplete and inaccurate chronology of events.
DTC's revocation decision quashed.
The Upper Tribunal found that the DTC's decision was based on mistaken facts and unreasonable conclusions, and the Appellant was denied natural justice.
Case remitted for a reconvened public inquiry before a different Traffic Commissioner.
To ensure fairness and impartiality, given the errors in the previous inquiry process.