Melton v Uttlesford District Council

A statutory appeal against refusal of a private hire vehicle driver’s licence is a rehearing of the decision actually made below. It cannot be used to challenge the validity of an earlier purported licence grant or to introduce a separate public law challenge. Where a licensing authority has adopted a lawful policy, the appellate court must apply that policy while substituting its own decision. Personal financial circumstances will ordinarily be irrelevant to whether an applicant is fit and proper. A judicial review claim must be brought promptly and within the prescribed period. A very long delay without good reason may justify refusal of an extension and permission, even without particular prejudice to the public authority.

Mr Melton appealed by case stated from the Crown Court’s dismissal of his appeal against the refusal of a private hire vehicle driver’s licence. The Crown Court had treated the matter as confined to the refusal of a new licence, rather than a challenge to the validity of a licence purportedly issued earlier by an unauthorised officer.

In conjoined judicial review proceedings, Mr Melton challenged the Council’s treatment of the earlier licence as invalid and claimed damages. The judicial review claim was issued more than two years after the relevant events. The central issues were the proper scope of the statutory appeal, the approach required when reconsidering a licensing decision made under a policy, and whether the delay should be excused.

1. The application for judicial review was refused. The relevant decision arose no later than 1 June 2006, so the claim should have been filed promptly and, in any event, by 31 August 2006 under CPR 54.5(1). The claimant had no good explanation for the delay. The court was entitled to refuse an extension under CPR 3.1(2)(a) and CPR 3.9 without treating particular prejudice as an essential precondition. In any event, the delay caused substantial prejudice and would be detrimental to good administration.

2. The proposed judicial review challenge was only marginally arguable. The principle stated by Farwell LJ in R v Shoreditch Assessment Committee ex parte Morgan [1910] 2 KB 859 concerned an inferior tribunal purporting finally to determine its own jurisdiction and thereby oust the High Court’s supervisory jurisdiction. The Council’s conduct did not have that legal effect. The purported licence was in fact invalid because it had been issued ultra vires by officers lacking authority.

3. The Crown Court correctly confined the rehearing to the appeal actually determined by the Magistrates’ Court, namely the refusal of a licence. Sections 77 and 301 of the relevant legislation made the Crown Court appeal a rehearing of the process that had occurred below. It could not determine an unappealed challenge to the earlier licence or to the procedural amendment of the Magistrates’ Court appeal.

4. The statutory appeal required the Crown Court to substitute its own decision, while paying proper regard to the Council’s conclusion and not reversing it merely because it was not satisfied that it was right. The court had to apply the Council’s lawful licensing policy as if standing in the Council’s shoes. The policy normally required refusal where the applicant had six or more penalty points for a serious motoring offence within the previous three years.

5. The Crown Court was entitled to conclude that there were no extenuating circumstances and that Mr Melton was not a fit and proper person to hold a licence. His denial of the offences supplied no mitigating explanation. Loss of livelihood and possession of a licence from a neighbouring authority were not material reasons to depart from the policy. The case stated questions were therefore answered affirmatively and the appeal was dismissed.

• High Court (Administrative Court): Melton v Uttlesford District Council [2009] EWHC 2845 (Admin). The case-stated appeal was dismissed and permission for judicial review was refused.
• Crown Court at Chelmsford: dismissed Mr Melton’s appeal against the Magistrates’ Court’s refusal of a licence on 4 January 2008.
• North West Essex Magistrates’ Court: dismissed the appeal against refusal of a private hire vehicle driver’s licence on 1 June 2007.