NDTU seeking court injunction

An application by the National Taxi Drivers Union (NTDU) for leave to challenge the controversial decision to deregulate the …

An application by the National Taxi Drivers Union (NTDU) for leave to challenge the controversial decision to deregulate the taxi industry will be heard in the High Court on Friday. The NDTU is also seeking an injunction to prevent the decision coming into effect.

When the matter was raised before Mr Justice Kelly yesterday, he said it seemed appropriate to hear the views of the Minister of State for the Environment, Mr Bobby Molloy, before deciding whether he should grant the taxi-drivers the legal relief they were seeking.

On Friday, the general secretary of the NTDU, Mr Thomas Gorman, and the union's vice-president, Mr Vincent Kearns, will seek leave to take proceedings to quash the Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) (Amendment) (No 3) Regulations, 2000 (Statutory Instrument 367 of 2000) - the decision deregulating the taxi industry.

They also want leave to seek declarations that the regulations exceed the power of the Minister. They claim Mr Molloy has no power under Section 82 of the 1961 Road Traffic Act (as amended) to regulate the licensing of public service vehicles in such a way as to interfere with the judicial powers of the courts.

READ MORE

They are also seeking leave to secure declarations that the regulations constitute an attack on the property rights of taxi-drivers and are unconstitutional and that existing taxi licence holders have a legitimate expectation that their property value in a licence should be maintained at a level commensurate with their investment in their licences.

In an affidavit, Mr Gorman said most of the members of the NTDU had applied for extra taxi plates announced by Mr Molloy last January. They were entitled to receive such licences subject to satisfactory terms of a scheme to be promulgated.

However, before any licences could be issued, a number of hackney drivers had applied to the courts to quash the decision of Mr Molloy and the issuing of licences was "restrained" pending the determination of those proceedings. Ultimately, Mr Justice Murphy had decided that the Minister had exceeded his power in issuing extra licences to taxi-plate holders. That decision was being appealed to the Supreme Court and proceedings were still pending.

However, Mr Molloy was now proposing to introduce new licensing arrangements in response to the High Court decision. The NTDU was not given the opportunity of consultation with the Minister beforehand, its officials complained.

Mr Gorman said he was advised that unless the NTDU was given the relief it sought, Mr Molloy would succeed in circumventing the judicial process in a manner contrary to Article 6 of the Constitution and the constitutionally enshrined doctrine of the separation of powers. "In this regard, I believe that my right of access to the courts and the very tenets of our democracy will be undermined," he said.

Mr John Rogers SC, for the NTDU, said what Mr Molloy had sought to do on November 21st last - deregulate the industry - had set at nought the Minister's proposals of January last.

After hearing the application, Mr Justice Kelly said he had come to the conclusion that he should not grant the leave sought without hearing from the Minister. Rather than deal with the matter on an ex-parte (one side only) basis, he would adjourn the application to Friday morning.