header-logo header-logo

19 January 2015
Issue: 7637 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

London taxis hailed the winners

Letting black cabs use bus lanes but excluding private minicabs does not confer a “selective economic advantage”, the European Court of Justice has said (Case C-518/13).

Private hire company Eventech, a subsidiary of Addison Lee, complained that Transport for London (TfL) gave London’s 23,000 distinctive black Hackney cabs an unfair advantage by allowing them to use bus lanes. However, the ECJ ruling marks black cabs out as distinctive for more than their ability to beat traffic jams.

In its judgment, the ECJ recognised that taxis are distinct from minicabs noting the former’s “legal status, are in a factual and legal situation which is distinct from that of minicabs, and consequently those two categories of vehicles are not comparable”. 

The ECJ notes that drivers of taxis are subject to strict standards in relation to their vehicles, their fares and their knowledge of the Capital’s streets, whereas those standards do not apply to minicabs.

The ECJ goes on to recognise that only taxis can ply for hire, they are subject to the rule of "compellability", they must be recognisable and capable of conveying persons in wheelchairs, and their drivers must set the fares for their services by means of a taxi meter and have a particularly thorough knowledge of London. Concluding that in that context, the bus lane policy does not confer a selective economic advantage on taxis.

Leon Daniels, TfL’s Managing Director of Surface Transport, says: “Our policy on bus lanes was upheld by the High Court. We welcome the opinion from the Advocate General and now the European Court of Justice, but ultimately await the decision of the Court of Appeal. As this process continues we are maintaining our well-understood and effective policy that helps to keep London moving in the interest of everyone.” TfL had argued also that letting all the minicabs into the bus lane would delay buses and that it would be difficult for customers to hail a taxi if it were not near the kerb.

Mr Justice Burton agreed, noting in his High Court judgment: “There is to my mind a clear distinction between the need of black cabs (and their passengers and the public) for them to be in the bus lanes, by way of visibility and availability of, and access to, black cabs for those hailing a cruising taxi.” 

The case now reverts to the Court of Appeal for a final decision, in R (on the application of Eventech Ltd) v The Parking Adjudicator, in which TfL and Camden Borough were named as interested parties. The High Court upheld TfL’s bus lane policy in 2012.

 

Issue: 7637 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll