It Is What It Looks Like!
22nd May, 2012
In VOSA –v– Kayes the Divisional Court has dismissed VOSA’s appeal against an acquittal by the Magistrates relating to the use of a showman’s vehicle.
The Defendant was a member of the Showman’s Guild and provides catering facilities at shows and fairgrounds. He did this from a specially designed vehicle. The vehicle was such that ordinarily it would require an operator’s licence and a test certificate. However, as a showman’s vehicle neither of these were necessary. There was also a reduced rate of road tax payable and an exemption from the use of tachograph recording equipment. After a roadside check VOSA took the view that the vehicle was not within the meaning of a “showman’s goods vehicle” as defined in Section 62 of the Vehicle & Excise Registration Act 1994. The showman was prosecuted for a range of offences related to the use of this vehicle.
In May 2011 the Magistrates found the Defendant was “self-evidently a showman”, that it therefore followed that his vehicle was a “showman’s goods vehicle” and that he was entitled to rely on the showman’s exemptions. He was acquitted. VOSA then appealed by way of a case stated. The Divisional Court found that any person would expect a show to include catering facilities and ruled that the Magistrates’ decision was correct and dismissed VOSA’s appeal.
If you would like advice regarding the issue raised in this article, please contact Tim Culpin on 01244 405533 or by email to [email protected].
You might also be interested in...
15th May, 2018
Experienced HR leader joins Aaron & Partners LLP Law firm with offices in Chester and Shrewsbury appoints Kate Robertson to drive HR strategy for more than 120 staff and to support the company’s growth Chester law firm Aaron & Partners LLP has strengthened its senior leadership team with the appointment of an experienced human resources manager. Kate Robertson... Read More »
24th April, 2018
Jan Chillery, Insolvency Partner at Aaron & Partners LLP, shares her experience and the reasons why we should be cautious before paying so-called “bailiffs” over the phone or online without vetting them first. My neighbour has told me that recently he had a CCJ (County Court Judgment) against him. A day or so later, he received a phone call... Read More »
11th April, 2018
Jan Chillery, Insolvency Partner comments on the recent case of Mr A M Coletta v Bath Hill Court – Bournemouth Property Management Ltd UKEAT 0200 17 RN To read the Transcript of Proceedings in full please click here “This case highlights an important aspect of the Statute of Limitations which affects a wider field than employment claims. An... Read More »