Singh v Roads and Maritime Services

Administrative Decisions Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Singh v Roads and Maritime Services [2013] NSWADT 312
Hearing dates:	10 December 2013
Decision date:	10 December 2013
Jurisdiction:	General Division
Before:	A Scahill, Judicial Member
Decision:	Decision to cancel authority affirmed
Legislation Cited:	Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Oaths Act 1900 Passenger Transport Act 1990 Passenger transport Regulation 2007
Cases Cited:	Miah v Roads and Maritime Services [2013] NSWADT 264 Saadieh v Director- General, Department of Transport [1999]NSWADT 68
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Nishan Singh (Applicant) Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
Representation:	Smythe Wozniak (Respondent)
File Number(s):	133312

reasons for decision

1. The Applicant, Mr Nishan Singh, has held a taxi-cab driver's authority in New South Wales since 29 June 2012. That driver's authority was cancelled by the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) on 9 October 2013. The reason why that authority was cancelled was that Mr Singh had committed two driving offences about which he had not notified the RMS. He had also falsely sworn two statutory declarations that it was not he who had been driving at the time but his brother.

1. Mr Singh was advised of the RMS decision and he sought a stay on the basis of his financial hardship. That stay was granted by the Tribunal on 22 October 2013.

1. The matter now before us is whether the original decision of the RMS to cancel Mr Singh's driver's authority is the correct and preferable decision, whether it should be affirmed, varied or overturned pursuant to sections 52(1) of the Passenger Transport Act and 63 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act.

1. In considering this matter the Tribunal needs to consider what the purpose is of the issuing of a taxi-cab driver's authority to an applicant. Section 33 of the Passenger Transport Act provides that the purpose of the issuing of an authority is to attest that the person is of good repute and in all other respects a fit and proper person to be driving a taxi-cab and that the person is considered to have sufficient responsibility and aptitude to drive a taxi-cab. In this matter the issue is basically whether or not Mr Singh is of good repute and in all other respects a fit and proper person to drive a taxicab and whether he has the requisite responsibility and aptitude to do so.

1. We have heard from Mr Singh that he agrees that he did in fact commit the driving offences. He was concerned that he would lose his licence, having been advised by RMS that he was close to the end of his demerit points. He had previously had his licence suspended in Queensland because he had used up his demerit point allocation and he was concerned that this might happen again.

1. Mr Singh says that he discussed with other drivers the options. He decided at that time that he should swear a statutory declaration that it had not been himself but rather his brother who was driving at the time. He says…