McGOFF v WOOD
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 30 November 1990 |
| Date | 30 November 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 10. |
| Court | Court of Session (Inner House - First Division) |
FIRST DIVISION.
Local government—Registration for community charge—Responsible person failing to return registration form timeously—Responsible person incompetent in checking his personal correspondence to which he attached little importance—"Reasonable excuse"—Whether reasonable excuse for not providing information—Abolition of Domestic Rates Etc. (Scotland) Act 1987 (cap. 47), secs. 17 and 291—Community Charges (Registration) (Scotland) Regulations 1988 (S.I. 1988 No. 157), reg. 12.2
Section 17 (5) of the Abolition of Domestic Rates Etc. (Scotland) Act 1987 and reg. 12 of the Community Charges (Registration) (Scotland) Regulations 1988 make provision inter alia for the responsible person in each household to register with and provide certain information in respect of the premises he occupies to the local community charges registration officer by means of the completion and return of an inquiry form. By section 17 (10) of the 1987 Act, failure to provide this information results in a mandatory civil penalty being
imposed upon the responsible person unless the registration officer is satisfied that the responsible person has a "reasonable excuse", for failing to comply with the statutory provisions.A responsible person, who lived alone and spent little time in his house, had claimed that he had completed a form making application for rebate but that he was not aware of having received the inquiry form for providing information for registration for the community charge. He had received reminder letters which he thought referred to the rebate application only. He admitted that he paid little attention to what he termed "junk mail". The community charges registration officer imposed a civil remedy of a fixed penalty fine of £50 under sec. 17 (5) of the 1987 Act, for failing to comply with the statutory provisions. The responsible person applied to the sheriff in terms of sec. 17 (12) of that Act, contending that he had had a "reasonable excuse" for this failure, within the meaning of sec. 17 (10). The sheriff granted the application on the grounds that where a civil penalty was imposed it was necessary to construe the phrase "reasonable excuse" generously and that, since the responsible person had not been neglectful or defiant of his legal obligations but rather he was only incompetent in checking his personal correspondence, the community charges registration officer had acted unreasonably in imposing the statutory penalty. The community charges registration officer thereafter appealed to the Court of Session.
Held, (1) that the appeal to the sheriff was of a judicial and not an administrative nature; but (2) that the idea that a civil penalty was to be imposed only where the responsible person was substantially neglectful or defiant of his legal obligations had no basis in the Act; (3) that the test which sec. 17 (10) laid down was simply whether there had been a reasonable excuse for the failure in duty which had occurred; (4) that, by suggesting that it would only be if there had been a wilful disregard of the obligation to provide the relevant information that the imposition of a civil penalty could be justified, the sheriff had, accordingly, erred; and (5) that it would not be a reasonable excuse for the respondent to say that he did not examine or read the form which it had been established had been left with him; and appealallowed.
Robert McGoff applied to the sheriff court by way of summary application under sec. 17 (12) of the Abolition of Domestic Rates Etc. (Scotland) Act 1987 against J. W. Wood, the community charges registration officer for Strathclyde Region, against a decision by him to impose a statutory fixed penalty of £50 under sec. 17 (10) for failing to comply with the statutory requirement to provide certain information with respect to the premises occupied by the applicant. The application was opposed by the community charges registration officer. The sheriff granted the application and the community charges registration officer thereafter appealed to the Court of Session.
The terms of the sheriff's decision are adequately set forth in the opinion of the court.
The cause came before the First Division, comprising the Lord President (Hope), Lord Mayfield and Lord Coulsfield, for a hearing on 16th November 1990. Eo die, their Lordships made avizandum.
At advising, on 30th November 1990, the opinion of the court was delivered by the Lord President (Hope).
OPINION OF THE COURT.—This is an appeal by the community charges registration officer for Strathclyde Region under sec. 29 (2) of the Abolition of Domestic Rates Etc. (Scotland) Act 1987. The respondent is the responsible person within the meaning of sec. 17 (6) of that Act for the premises in which he resides. He had appealed to the sheriff under sec. 17 (12) against a civil penalty of £50 which was imposed on him because of his failure to supply information to the registration officer. That was information which he was required to give within the prescribed period of 21 days under sec. 17 (5) of the Act and para. 12 of the Community Charges (Registration) (Scotland) Regulations (S.I. 1988 No. 157). It should be noted in passing that those provisions have been amended in certain respects since the date when the requirement was made: Local Government Finance Act 1988, Sched. 13, Pt. IV and Community Charges (Registration) (Scotland) (No. 2)...
To continue reading
Request your trial