Deborah Marie Toner T/A DDT Haulage v Head of the Transport Regulation Unit

A licensing decision must be based on the statutory provisions in force when it is made. A repealed provision cannot lawfully support revocation or refusal of an operator’s licence. Where a decision refers alternatively to discretionary and mandatory powers, the decision-maker must genuinely identify and apply the correct power. A decision is unlawful where the reasoning shows that mandatory revocation under the incorrect provision drove the outcome, without proper consideration of the discretionary alternatives. An appeal is allowed where the process of reasoning and application of the law require a different view.

The appellant held a standard international goods vehicle operator’s licence. Following earlier regulatory action and a consent order, she was required to nominate an external transport manager for approval by 31 January 2022. The nominated transport manager was not approved because the application remained incomplete.

The Head of the Transport Regulation Unit revoked the licence under sections 23 and 24 of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act (Northern Ireland) 2010, treating section 24 as imposing mandatory revocation for lack of professional competence. By the date of the decision, however, section 12A(2)(d) had been omitted by the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Amendment Regulations 2022. The central issues were whether the decision relied on a repealed statutory provision and whether the discretionary power under section 23 had genuinely been exercised.

1. Appeal allowed. The decision dated 17 June 2022 was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Department for reconsideration. A hearing, whether public or private, was mandated.
2. The decision purported to rely on section 12A(2)(d) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act (Northern Ireland) 2010 as the professional competence requirement. That provision had been omitted by regulation 1(b) and regulation 82(1)(e) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Amendment Regulations 2022, with effect from 17 March 2022. It therefore could not provide the legal basis for the revocation decision made on 17 June 2022. That aspect of the decision was plainly wrong.
3. The reference to section 23(1)(e), concerning an unfulfilled licence undertaking, did not save the decision. Although section 23 permits discretionary regulatory action, including revocation, suspension or curtailment, the reasoning showed that the decision-maker was intent on applying section 24 because revocation under that provision was regarded as mandatory.
4. The decision contained no genuine analysis of the operation of the discretionary power under section 23 or of why suspension or curtailment should not be considered. The purported reliance on section 23 was therefore also plainly wrong.
5. The Upper Tribunal’s appellate jurisdiction involves a review of the material before the decision-maker, rather than a rehearing. The appellant must show that the decision is wrong and that the reasoning and application of the law require a different view. That threshold was met.
6. The Tribunal expressed concern that the Department had previously applied repealed legislative provisions to the detriment of operators, describing the practice as careless.

• Head of the Transport Regulation Unit: revoked the appellant’s standard international operator’s licence on 17 June 2022 under sections 23 and 24 of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act (Northern Ireland) 2010.
• Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber): allowed the appeal, set aside the decision and remitted the matter to the Department for reconsideration.