Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Charge against unlicensed taxi should not have been dismissed for lack of payment of fare
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court allows appeal by way of case stated from the District Court, and determines that the court should not have dismissed a charge against a driver for driving persons 'for reward' without a public service vehicle licence, on the grounds that: (a) although there had been no agreed contract as to price, or money changing hands, a request for €20 at the conclusion of the journey clearly showed that the driver had expected payment; and (b) admissions made by the driver under caution amounted to clear evidence that the court was entitled to rely upon when making its decision.
Case stated - charge of driving for reward without public service vehicle licence - s.22(2)(a) of the Taxi Regulation Acts 2013 and 2016 - no money changing hands - no agreement as to fare - whether 'for reward' required prior agreement as to price or payment of fare - whether case should have been dismissed.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
