A Adams (Haulage) Limited

A standard operator’s licence holder must maintain professional competence through a suitable transport manager. Where that requirement is no longer met, revocation under section 27 of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995 is mandatory unless the operator rectifies the position within a permitted period.

Procedural fairness requires clear notice of the proposed revocation and a real opportunity to make representations, seek a period of grace, nominate a replacement, or request an inquiry. It does not excuse an operator’s failure to act on clear directions. On appeal, intervention is not justified unless the decision involved an error of law or fact, or the facts and law otherwise require the appeal to be allowed.

The Traffic Commissioner for Scotland revoked the appellant company’s standard international operator’s licence after its nominated transport manager resigned and no replacement was nominated.

The Office of the Traffic Commissioner gave written notice of the professional-competence concern. It explained how the company could seek a period of grace, nominate a replacement transport manager, or request a public inquiry. The company’s responses did not provide evidence of a replacement, a course booking, or a compliant period-of-grace request. Its first clear request for a public inquiry was made after revocation.

The company appealed, alleging inadequate time and procedural unfairness. The central issue was whether the Traffic Commissioner’s revocation decision was legally or factually wrong, or otherwise should be disturbed on appeal.

1. The appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal set aside the stay of revocation with effect from 23.59 on 14 May 2025.

2. The appellant had known from 3 May 2024 that it would lose its transport manager at the end of that month. There was no evidence that it took timely steps to recruit or nominate a replacement, or to arrange for another person to obtain the necessary qualification.

3. The notices of 4 June and 3 July 2024 clearly explained the consequences of failing to maintain professional competence, the information required for a period of grace, and the right to request a public inquiry under the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995. The appellant’s responses were inadequate. They did not contain a compliant request for a period of grace, evidence of a replacement transport manager, or a request for an inquiry.

4. The Tribunal rejected the submission that a statement that the company would be content with an inquiry if required was itself a request for one. There was no application to restore Vari Adams’s good repute and no actual request for a public inquiry before the licence was revoked.

5. Applying the appeal test in Bradley Fold Travel & Peter Wright v Secretary of State for Transport (2010) EWCA Civ.695, there was no procedural unfairness, error of law, mistake of fact, or other basis on which the Tribunal should interfere with the Traffic Commissioner’s decision.

• Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber): Dismissed the appeal and upheld the Traffic Commissioner’s revocation of the operator’s licence.
• Traffic Commissioner for Scotland: On 19 July 2024, revoked the appellant’s standard international operator’s licence under section 27(1) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995.