Ghafoor and Others v Wakefield District Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 July 1990 |
| Date | 18 July 1990 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
Queen's Bench Division
Before Mr Justice Webster
Transport - taxis - licences - numerical limit
A local authority considering an application for a licence to operate a hackney carriage within its area was not obliged, where it was unable to satisfy itself that there was no significant unmet demand for hackney carriages, to issue new licences without limit of number.
Mr Justice Webster so held in the Queen's Bench Division in dismissing two appeals by way of case stated by Abdul Ghafoor and 13 others against the dismissal by Wakefield Crown Court on June 21, 1989 of their appeals against the refusal by Wakefield District Council to grant them licences to operate hackney carriages.
Section 37 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 provides: "The commissioners may from time to time license to ply for hire within the prescribed distance … such number of hackney carriages of any kind or description adapted to the carriage of persons as they think fit."
Section 16 of the Transport Act 1985 provides: "The provisions of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 with respect to hackney carriages … shall have effect (a) as if in section 37, the words `such number of' and `as they think fit' were omitted; and (b) as if they provided that the grant of a licence may be refused, for the purpose of limiting the number of hackney carriages in respect of which licences are granted, if, but only if, the person authorised to grant a licence is satisfied that there is no significant demand for the services of hackney carriages (within the area to which the licence would apply) which is unmet."
Mr Simon Bourne-Arton for the appellants; Mr Patrick E Robertshaw for the council.
MR JUSTICE WEBSTER said that until 1988 the council had not granted any new licences from at least 1974 and possibly from the early 1950s. Upon the passing of the Transport Act 1985 the council received a significant number of applications for taxi licences but it declined to grant any further licences.
The appellants applied to the council for licences to operate taxis but were refused. They then appealed to the crown court which dismissed the appeals on the ground that there was no significant unmet demand for taxis in the relevant area to which the licence would have applied if granted.
His Lordship said that before the amendments to the 1847 Act in the 1985 Act took effect a licensing authority had an unfettered discretion to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wirral Borough Council Derek Smith and Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council William Atwell Kelly
...I think I need only refer to a short passage from a decision of Webster J in Ghafoor and Others v. Wakefield Metropolitan Borough Council [1990] RTR 389. At page 394 Webster J, differing from a view earlier expressed by Nolan J (as he then was), said this: "In my view the effect of section ......