Terrain Construction Group Limited v Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (T): [2026] UKUT 65 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Citron on 09 February 2026.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
The Traffic Commissioner refused the Appellant’s application for release of a detained vehicle for three alternative reasons, each of which would justify refusal on its own. The Upper Tribunal considered that two of these reasons were not plainly wrong: these were that, on the evidence before him, the Traffic Commissioner was not satisfied either that the Appellant was the lawful owner of the vehicle when it was detained, or that the Appellant did not know that the vehicle was being used without an operator’s licence (when it should have had one). The Upper Tribunal found that the Traffic Commissioner had neither erred in law, nor was plainly wrong, in making these factual findings on the evidence before him. The Upper Tribunal noted that, as the Appellant had chosen not to send a representative to the hearing before the Traffic Commissioner, the Appellant had not been able to give oral evidence, or explain its case, in ways that might perhaps have persuaded the Traffic Commissioner to make different findings on these factual matters; but it was not fair or just to allow the Appellant to do these things at the Upper Tribunal stage. The appeal was dismissed.