Reading Borough Council v Hussain

Whether conduct gives rise to a reasonable excuse depends on the statutory context and the conduct required to be justified. Mere forgetfulness, without more, cannot amount in law to a reasonable excuse for failing to display a private hire driver's badge as required by the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976. Forgetfulness may nevertheless be relevant when combined with other circumstances bearing on the reasonableness of the excuse. Whether facts are capable of amounting to a reasonable excuse is a question of law; whether they do so is a question of fact and degree for the magistrates. The matter was remitted for conviction, with an absolute discharge indicated and no order for costs.

Reading Borough Council appealed by way of case stated against the dismissal by justices of an information alleging that Asghar Hussain, while acting under a private hire driver's licence, had failed to wear his driver's badge so that it was plainly and distinctly visible, contrary to section 54(2) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

The justices found that Mr Hussain had removed the badge during a prayer break, had forgotten to replace it, and had been under pressure to resume work. They concluded that these circumstances amounted to a reasonable excuse. The central issue was whether simple forgetfulness, in those circumstances, was capable in law of constituting a reasonable excuse.

1. Appeal allowed in substance. The answer to the question stated for the opinion of the High Court was no. A reasonable bench of magistrates, properly directed, could not lawfully treat mere forgetfulness alone as a reasonable excuse for failing to display the badge required by section 54 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.
2. The distinction in Law v Stephens [1971] RTR 358 was applied. Whether facts are capable of amounting to a reasonable excuse is a question of law. Whether the facts do amount to such an excuse is a question of fact and degree for the magistrates.
3. The phrase reasonable excuse must be considered in its statutory context. Authorities concerning offensive weapons or the provision of drink-driving specimens cannot automatically be transferred to the badge-display offence.
4. On the facts found, the case involved simple forgetfulness. Mr Hussain had time to replace the badge after his prayer break, and it would have taken only a moment to do so. The observations in R v McCalla (1988) 87 Cr App R 372 and R v Glidewell [1999] 163 JP 557 showed that forgetfulness may be relevant when coupled with particular circumstances, but those circumstances were absent here.
5. The matter was remitted to the magistrates with a direction to convict. The court indicated that the appropriate penalty would be an absolute discharge. No order for costs was made.

• High Court (Administrative Court): The appeal by way of case stated was allowed in substance. The matter was remitted to the magistrates with a direction to convict.