Vehicle & Operator Services Agency v Johnson

For the purposes of the statutory definition of a public service vehicle, “adapted” means apt, fit or suitable, rather than merely physically altered. Seating capacity must be assessed by reference to the accommodation realistically provided in the vehicle, applying the statutory minimum seating standard where relevant. Straight-line measurement is not necessarily decisive where seating is arranged around a corner or otherwise prevents each passenger from having the required space. Design, seat belts and actual use are relevant factors, but ordinarily do not determine the issue. Operators cannot avoid the statutory definition by relying on luxury design or generous spacing if the vehicle is substantively suitable for more than eight passengers.

The Vehicle & Operator Services Agency brought a prosecutor’s appeal from justices sitting at Swansea on 19 March 2003. The respondent faced three informations concerning the use of a stretch limousine without the required public service vehicle licensing, fitness certification and driver authorisation.

The vehicle carried nine passengers and was used for hire or reward. The central issue was whether it was a public service vehicle within section 1(1) of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981, namely whether it was adapted to carry more than eight passengers. The justices concluded that, in normal use, it was not practicable for the vehicle to carry a ninth passenger and dismissed all three informations.

1. The appeal was dismissed. The justices’ question was answered “yes”, meaning that their conclusion that the vehicle was not adapted to carry more than eight passengers was open to them on the evidence.

2. Under section 1(1) of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981, “adapted” means apt, fit or suitable. The issue is the vehicle’s practical suitability for carrying more than eight passengers, not simply the number actually carried or the fact that the vehicle has been physically modified.

3. The minimum seating allowance in regulation 28 paragraph 1b of the Public Service Vehicle (Conditions of Fitness, Equipment, Use and Certification) Regulations 1981 provides relevant assistance in assessing suitability. The principle in Traffic Commissioners for the South Wales Traffic Area v Snape and Another [1977] RTR 367 could not be applied mechanically to the limousine’s L-shaped seating. A corner seat could not be treated as a straight-line continuation where doing so would deprive a passenger of the required 400 millimetres of usable seating space.

4. The design and layout of the seating, the number of seat belts and the purpose of the vehicle were relevant considerations. They were not ordinarily determinative. A vehicle’s operator could not defeat the statutory purpose by relying on style rather than the substance of the accommodation.

5. The justices were entitled to regard the actual arrangement of the seats and the practicability of carrying a ninth passenger in normal use as decisive. Their finding did not give undue weight to the vehicle’s luxury design. The respondent’s costs were summarily assessed at £2,689.58 and ordered to be paid out of central funds.

• High Court (Administrative Court): prosecutor’s appeal from the decision of justices sitting at Swansea on 19 March 2003. Appeal dismissed.