Disabled taxi driver wins disability exemption

Council should have treated him as special case for not requiring compliant vehicle

News, 25 April 2008

A disabled taxi driver has won an appeal against a local authority ruling that required him to have a car suited to disabled passengers.

Dundee man John Coutie had applied for a taxi licence from Dundee City Council, whose policy was that applicants for a new licence had to operate a vehicle with European Whole Volume Type Approval, the highest specification for disabled-accessible vehicles, and the most expensive.

Supporting his claim for exemption, Mr Coutie put forward medical evidence that his condition, a chronic back injury sustained while serving in the armed forces, made it difficult for him to assist wheelchair-bound passengers. The council however refused to vary their policy, despite a previous sheriff's ruling that they should reconsider their refusal, arguing that Mr Coutie was not bound to provide assistance personally if incapable, and that he could employ another driver.

Mr Coutie, who wanted to drive himself, appealed again. This time Sheriff Richard Davidson held that the council had failed to exercise their discretion properly and ordered them to grant him a licence with out the condition.

"The bottom line", Sheriff Davidson said, "is that no reasonable licensing authority properly considering the special circumstances of an application such as the pursuer's could have come to the conclusion that his was not a special case in which a departure from their policy would be appropriate."

The sheriff said it was "something of a supreme irony" that in their efforts to secure the best service for wheelchair bound passengers, the council had disregarded the need to apply the same considerations to him. If they were worried about him getting round the policy, they could have applied a condition that only Mr Coutie was to drive the car.

"If this pursuer's circumstances do not justify a departure from the defenders' policy", he added, "then it is hard to see what circumstances would justify such a departure, and if no circumstances justify a departure then the defenders are operating a rigid policy with no exercise of discretion, which is unlawful."

Sheriff Davidson's decision can be read at http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/B876.html .