Diabetic wins appeal
Page 16
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A DIABETIC Norfolk lorry driver has won a High Court appeal against refusal to renew his hgv driving licence.
The court ruled that in deciding whether an applicant for an hgv driving licence suffered from a disease or disability that was likely to make his driving dangerous to the public, the word "likely" must mean more than a bare possibility if he is to have his appeal refused.
Malcolm Bennington had been an hgv driver for 18 years and for 16 years he had suffered from diabetes controlled by insulin.
His application for renewal was refused on medical grounds by the Eastern Licensing Authority Kenneth Peter, and that decision was upheld on appeal by the Swaffham magistrates.
However, the High Court has ruled that the magistrates misinterpreted the rules and has directed them to reconsider the case.
Giving judgment, Mr Justice Woolf said that the magistrates had ruled that it could not be said that Mr Bennington would not suffer from a hypoglycaemia attack while driving a heavy goods vehicle.
However, in his view that did not correctly reflect Rule Four of the Heavy Goods Vehicle (Drivers Licences) Regulations 1977, which provided that an applicant for a licence should not suffer from a disease or disability likely to cause his driving to be a source of danger.
The word "likely" in the context meant something more than a bare possibility but less than a probability. In the circumstances the magistrates had erred in law by applying the wrong test and the matter should be sent back to them.
Mr Justice Woolf also felt that the magistrates had been wrong in allowing Mr Bennington's hgv licence to continue in force pending the outcome of the High Court appeal saying that under the Road Traffic Act 1972 they had no power to do so.