Elite Vehicle Repairs Ltd

An appeal from a Traffic Commissioner is assessed by whether the decision was wrong on the facts or law under the Bradley Fold test. The Upper Tribunal may not consider circumstances that did not exist when the Commissioner made the determination. That statutory restriction is mandatory and leaves no discretion, so a post-determination event cannot be considered as a basis for finding the original decision wrong.

Elite Vehicle Repairs Ltd applied for a standard national operator’s licence for five vehicles. The Traffic Commissioner for the West Midlands refused the application because the company had not supplied requested information about its proposed transport manager’s refresher training or its sole director’s road-transport experience, and had not given the requested undertakings. The company appealed, explaining that the transport manager completed a refresher course after the refusal and providing details of the director’s earlier vehicle-recovery experience. The Upper Tribunal considered whether the later material affected the appeal and whether the refusal was wrong on the facts or law.

The appeal is dismissed. The Traffic Commissioner had refused the application after the company failed to provide requested information about the proposed transport manager’s refresher training and the director’s road-transport experience, or to give the requested undertakings. Under s.13(5) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995, a standard operator’s licence application must be refused if a requirement in s.13(1) is not satisfied.

Paragraph 9(2) of Schedule 4 to the Transport Act 1985 prevents the Tribunal from considering circumstances that did not exist at the time of the Traffic Commissioner’s determination. The restriction is mandatory and leaves no discretion. The transport manager completed his refresher course after the refusal, so that later event could not be considered. The Tribunal also noted that the director’s earlier experience had not been provided to the OTC in response to its request. It observed that timely information might have allowed the company an opportunity to satisfy the licensing requirements, but that possibility did not establish that the refusal was wrong.

Applying the appellate test in Bradley Fold Travel & Peter Wright v Secretary of State for Transport (2010) EWCA Civ.695, the Tribunal was satisfied that the Traffic Commissioner’s decision was neither wrong on the facts nor wrong in law. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Postscript. The Tribunal noted that the OTC’s decision had been made under delegated authority. In light of paragraph 3 of the Senior Traffic Commissioner’s Statutory Document 8, that decision was to be treated as having been made by the Traffic Commissioner.

1. Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber): dismissed the appeal, holding that the Traffic Commissioner’s refusal was neither wrong on the facts nor in law [2026] UKUT 225 (AAC) .
2. Traffic Commissioner for the West Midlands: refused the company’s application for a standard national operator’s licence on 23 September 2025.