Cabbie who injured cyclist in hit-and-run incident gets taxi licence back after landmark High Court decision

If you step back and ponder this without getting emotive it's a sound ruling in my opinion.

I loathe the guy for what he did but I think that it is proper and just that the deciding authority has to prove that he is unfit rather him prove that he is not.

If you are suspected of committing a criminal offence you don't have to prove you are innocent, the law states the prosecuting authority has to prove you are guilty. I can't see why this cannot apply to taxi driver permits and their regulation. I do hope that the authority involved now retrospectively begins proceedings proper.

Unbelievable! Careful in Brighton everyone!

How about proving he is fit to drive a taxi again by retaking his driving test?  In fact why not make that the rule for all?

One solution: if this driver gets his operating licence back then boycott the taxi company that uses him.

A question for My Luds: would you allow  a gamekeeper to get their firearms licence as apart of a means of earning of a living if they had been found guilty of causing injury by reckless use of a shotgun?

"I'm torn on this one. On one hand I strongly believe you should be innocent until proven guilty, but surely if you are guilty of fleeing the scene you are automatically not fit to drive for a living. "

I don't understand the conflict. 

Yes, innocent until proven guilty, but he pleaded guilty, to hit-and-run.  If that doesn't make you ineligible to be a professional driver I don't know what does.

I may be entirely wrong, but I suspect this is probably about the council having to introduce new procedures before they can strip someone of their license rather than suggesting this individual is fit to drive despite their poor driving record.  Rather than it being an automatic process, the council would have to have a review panel and a system of appeal, just as you might expect before being dismissed for misconduct from a permanent job.

From the outside, it looks like a bizare story.

but the judgement does not appear to be about weather this person is fit an propper to hold a license - really it looks like this is about the mechanisumn used to acutally suspend the license?

...so I'm guessing the next step is for the council to re-write their rules and checks on taxi drivers?

I wonder if this was the guy that nearly had me off the other weekend .... wish I'd paid a bit more attention to the palte now ...

oooo!  I forgot I'm running a fly6 now, it's probably still on there.

If a Driving Instructor gets more than six points on their licence, they're not allowed to instruct.  Can't see what the difference here is . . . . . 9 points?!

OK then, fair enough.  Now B&H council are proceeding to prove that he's not fit, by way of his conviction, and remove it again, yes?

I dispare, the idiot has proved that they are unfit to drive, not only did they hit someone but they then fled the scene! What more proof does the council need!!!

what the bleep, the council have to prove he's not fit to drive a taxi? Surely by the very fact that he's just had 9 points put on his licence while driving a taxi is not evidence of unfitness?

What we need is taxi licences that are automatically invalidated when the driver has been found guilty of certain offences...

Just a simple change to the licencing rules and Bob's your mother's brother...

Surely his driving conviction is the proof that he is unfit to hold a taxi licence? The council isn't "interfering with his right to earn a living", it's just saying that he can't carry on this particular business any more because he's a bit rubbish at driving and his judgement is a but suspect. Analogous to a butcher who consistently sold rotten meat being told he can't be a butcher any more.

As others have said, the council didn't arbitrarily withdraw his taxi licence, they did it as a consequence of his actions.

I'm torn on this one. On one hand I strongly believe you should be innocent until proven guilty, but surely if you are guilty of fleeing the scene you are automatically not fit to drive for a living. In reality all it will do is sap a little more of the money available to local government, quite possibly at the expense of cycling infrastructure etc.

The fucker should be banned from driving for life irrespective of his need to drive a taxi to earn a living! He clearly has contempt for other road users in particular vulnerable road users such as cyclists. Still hopefully his insurance premiums should now be extortionate.

What do the council need to do to prove he isn't a fit and proper person - surely analyse his driving history, what will they find? Oh quele suprise - they find a recent conviction for careless driving, leaving the scene and 9 points. Sounds like appropriate proof to me

Legalese bullshit.

Would you let a teacher back in the class room if he was found guilty of hitting pupils?