[2024] UKUT 132 (AAC)

The Traffic Commissioner is required to revoke an operator’s standard PSV operator’s licence if the operator’s designated transport manager no longer satisfies the requirements of section 14ZA(3) of the 1981 Act. The requirement to revoke must be read as extending to the case of an operator which no longer has a designated transport manager.

The operator’s grounds of appeal do not clearly identify any mistake made by the Traffic Commissioner in revoking the operator’s licence. However, the grounds may intend to argue that the Traffic Commissioner unfairly led the operator to believe that, once the operator had submitted a new designated transport manager application, there was no need to request a further period of grace (a period during which the operator would be permitted to operate without a designated transport manager). We shall approach the operator’s grounds of appeal on that basis.

Whether the operator’s period of grace expired on 9 April 2023 or 18 April 2023, it cannot be disputed that, at the expiry date, the operator had failed to submit a complete application form for authorisation of a designated transport manager. The form submitted on 30 March 2023, which was signed by Mr Ford and Ms Hughes, director of the operator, did not answer the form’s standard question about the number of hours that, each week, the prospective transport manager would devote to managing the operator’s transport operations. Since all other sections of the form were completed, and this application followed an earlier application that was also incomplete, this omission cannot be considered an oversight. The operator says the question was ‘missed’ but does not explain why. Given Mr Ford’s other commitments, as documented in the evidence, it is more likely than not that the omission was intentional.

The operator’s director, Ms Hughes, argues that, upon submitting the transport manager application in respect of Mr Ford, she assumed no further period of grace was required. However, we find that she had knowingly submitted an incomplete transport manager application form. Ms Hughes could not reasonably have believed that a complete application had been submitted, that is one which was likely to lead to the authorisation of Mr Ford to act as the operator’s transport manager. We therefore reject the argument that the operator’s course of dealing with the OTC unfairly led the operator to believe that no further period of grace was required upon the expiry (on 9 or 18 April 2023) of the period of grace previously allowed. The operator could not reasonably have expected the Traffic Commissioner to authorise a transport manager to act as such in response to an application form that failed to address the important issue of the amount of time that Mr Ford intended to devote to managing the operator’s transport activities. We therefore dismiss this appeal.

Finally, we apologise for the delay in giving this decision. Initially, due to an administrative oversight this case was not marked on the Upper Tribunal’s case management system as ready for decision. And, subsequently, the judge was absent from duties while recovering from injuries sustained in an accident.