Grounds of appeal
Grounds of appeal
The Appellant’s written grounds of appeal were brief, but they clearly disclosed that it felt that it had been treated unfairly by the Traffic Commissioner’s refusal to give it a little more time to secure a new transport manager.
At the hearing before the Upper Tribunal, the Appellant’s director, Mr Bulpitt, said that his former transport manager did not inform him in March 2024 that she had resigned. He only learnt of this in July 2024. As soon as he was aware of the transport manager’s resignation, he acted as promptly as he could to identify a replacement. Mr Bulpitt found it difficult to understand why the Traffic Commissioner would not wait just a few days longer, in early September 2024, for him to confirm arrangements with his proposed replacement transport manager. He applied for a short period of grace but his application was not even acknowledged, and he was never told why it had been refused.
- Heading
- This appeal is ALLOWED. The Traffic Commissioner’s decision of 6 September 2024, directing revocation of operator’s licence no. OH2039823, was made in error of law. Under section 37(2) of the Goods Ve
- Subject matter: Revocation of standard operator’s licence / period of grace / public inquiries
- The Traffic Commissioner’s decision-making
- Legal framework
- Grounds of appeal
- Conclusions
- Conclusions
![[2024] UKUT 421 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)