London Bus Group Lmited: [2025] UKUT 83 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Ovey on 10 March 2025.
Read the full decision in
Judicial Summary
The appellant was called, together with two other operators, to a public inquiry in Edinburgh after one of the other operators (Club Class Bus (Edinburgh) Limited) failed to respond to notification that the transport manager had resigned. The appellant’s sole director was also the sole director of the other operators and of their common parent. The call-up letter raised issues of failure to comply with undertakings, repute and financial standing. At the inquiry the traffic commissioner found that none of the operators had shown financial standing but gave them a period of grace to do so. The other two operators surrendered their licences, but the appellant, on the last day of the period of grace, applied in the South East and Metropolitan Area to vary the licence by increasing the authorisation, stating that evidence of financial standing would be supplied, and asking for a public inquiry. On the same day the director informed the Edinburgh office of that application, but without referring to the existing period of grace, which expired without financial standing having been shown. The Scottish traffic commissioner revoked the licence. We decided that she had been right to do so and right to do so without holding a further inquiry. On appeal the appellant argued that it had a legitimate expectation that the period of grace had been extended, as a result of a letter written by the OTC in Leeds after the period of grace had expired requiring evidence of financial standing in support of the variation application. We accepted that the doctrine of legitimate expectation applies also in Scots public law but decided that in the circumstances the appellant had no legitimate expectation. The appellant also objected to having been called to the conjoined hearing. We decided that there had been no injustice and it was obviously sensible that hearings involving the good repute of the common and sole director of all three operators and their financial standing should be heard together.