A CLASH over a council's taxi colour code rule is to be settled at crown court later this year.
The scheduled hearing at Durham Crown Court was yesterday delayed to allow taxi drivers time to rebut evidence put forward by the city council in support of its ruling that the entire hackney carriage fleet should be a uniform white.
City councillors made the decision last year to ensure taxis are easily identifiable on city streets. Drivers and operators objected, claiming passengers would not be able to distinguish local cabs from those of neighbouring areas, including Chester-le-Street and Sunderland, which are also white.
They also feared it would create difficulties as many manufacturers do not make white cars as standard, leaving drivers facing months of delay after ordering replacement vehicles, or facing a £2,000-plus bill for a respray.
Adrian Fets, chairman of Durham Independent Taxi Association, challenged the council's decision at the city magistrates' court.
His appeal was upheld, overturning the ruling, with a costs award made against the council.
The council subsequently lodged its own appeal against the magistrates' decision, to be heard at the crown court.
But the hearing, set to go ahead yesterday, was adjourned after an eleventh- hour application by Mr Fets' barrister Martin Towers.
He said he would need time to consider and seek to rebut evidence submitted by the council only 24-hours earlier.
Mr Towers told the court: "A substantial amount of evidence was disclosed by the council yesterday, which Mr Fets or any of his six witnesses have yet to see.
"It includes a number of matters set out for the first time which Mr Fets would seek to call rebuttal evidence against." Mr Towers said the new evidence was from neighbouring councils where similar rulings are already in force, claming there were few problems in the introduction of a uniform colour code.
"Some of the taxi drivers would say they have been in liaison with drivers in those areas saying they have had difficulties," he said.
Judge Peter Armstrong agreed to Mr Towers' request and the hearing was re-scheduled to start on April 7.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article