(2009/041 Waterstone Motors t/a the Green Bus Service).
23.As for disqualification, the TC considered the case law (2010/29 David Finch Haulage; 2009/011 Katherine Oliver and H W Swan T Partners; Catch22Bus Limited & Philip Higgs v The Secretary of State for Transport (2019) EWCA Civ 1022). The case law indicated that an order of disqualification was justified and required in cases where the operator could not be trusted to comply with the regulatory regime and when it was an appropriate order to uphold the objectives of the system and to ensure the protection of the public and fairness to other operators. Even if Mr Singh had not operated the R&J vehicles during the suspension period, the facts of the case (the previous revocation and the number of public inquiries) merited disqualification for a period of between two and three years. A message was necessary to protect road safety and fair competition and to make clear that operators could not make promises at a public inquiry and then revert to “previous errant ways”. The aggravating features had been set out. If operators become tempted to do the same as Mr Singh in the hope of not being found out, the regime would collapse with catastrophic consequences. The case required a significant period of disqualification. In 2014/4-41 C G Cargo Limited and Sandhu the Upper Tribunal drew attention to the suggested range of 5 to 10 years for conduct meriting the description “severe”. The aggravating features placed the case firmly in this category and 7 years was justified. The TC further determined that Mr Singh may seek to persuade family members or long-term contacts to help him evade the impact of this decision and accordingly, she determined to make an Order under s28(4) of the 1995 Act.