The Prankster notes the document was last edited in July 2014, and so does not think too much should be read into the fact that VCS's current contract terminates in 2015.
VCS has already had their contract renewed once.That contract, which ended in June 2013, saw VCS pay a fee of £25,000 to be allowed to issue charges for stopping on the roadway. VCS then paid up to 35% of the charge in a further concession fee.
Although the airport denies byelaws are in place, this document on Ryan Air's web site suggests they have selective memory failure.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
Amazing foresight to include an apology for the delay in a template.
ReplyDeleteThis FOI request unearthed the most recent copy of the byelaws;
ReplyDeletehttps://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/byelaws_john_lennon_airport?unfold=1
Yes - its obviously a smoke screen. You cannot sensibly have an airport without byelaws. Are they saying that anyone can just wander around and do what they like on site? I think they would very quickly pull the byelaws out in such a case.
Deletethe bylaws are dated 1982 IF any changes were needed after the building of the new terminal , they would have been amended at the time, not simply forgotten about., or used selectively
ReplyDeletebut they do use bylaws , this JLA terms and conditions 2014 , http://www.liverpoolairport.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/conditions-of-use-13-14.pdf
ReplyDeleteclearly stated
6. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF USE
6.1.2 Compliance with Airport Byelaws, instructions orders as published from time to time by the
Company, the Civil Aviation Authority, the DfT or UK Border Authority.
who,s lying now?
This article from 'inhouselawer.co.uk' come to mind when I see this type of contract.
ReplyDeleteConspiracy
Conspiracy exists when two or more parties agree together to take some action directed at another with the intent and result of causing loss. Conspiracy was not dealt with specifically in OBG, but has been given extensive treatment in the recent case of Total Network.
This case highlights that whereas causing loss by unlawful means is a three-way tort, involving not just a claimant and defendant but also an unlawful act against a third party, conspiracy is essentially a two-way tort, involving something akin to joint tortfeasors acting directly against a defendant. This has ramifications for the way the usual tests are applied.
Essentially, there are two types of conspiracy: unlawful means conspiracy, by which participants conspire to commit unlawful acts, and conspiracy, where participants perform acts that are not unlawful, but which are done with the predominant purpose of causing damage to the claimant. Here the conspiracy itself constitutes the unlawful act.
To establish an action in conspiracy it is not necessary to show that there was a contractual relationship between the conspirators, but simply that the parties acted to achieve a common object.
Oh heck, I'll get my tin foil hat on :)
DeleteByelaws are a legisaltive requirtement. They are forbidden to operate an airport without them.
ReplyDeletePewrhaps the Minisiter for Aviation (or a relevant department) could be drawn on this.
However the decalration of the "red route" takes the use of PoFA out of the picture as this is not a parking matter.
correct , it was a stopping matter , and the DVLA gives the details away incorrectly
Delete