TEAMCARD PTY LTD v STATE OF NSW [2011] NSWSC 1008

TEAMCARD PTY LTD v STATE OF NSW [2011] NSWSC 1008

Any engagement of transport service providers under the RFT would be by the Department of Education or selected students, not by anyone in the capacity of a member of the public. Carriage under the Assisted School Travel Program therefore did not constitute a public passenger service under the Passenger Transport Act 1990 (NSW), so providers did not need accreditation under that Act for the service. Because services under the RFT were not public passenger services, they were not taxi-cab services even if performed by taxi-cabs, and the Director-General's fare determination under s 60A did not limit the loaded kilometre rates tendered. The summons was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Summons Seeking Orders in the Nature of Certiorari and Mandamus and a Declaration Concerning Refusal to Amend a Request for Tender / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The summons is dismissed and the Plaintiffs are to pay the Defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
['assisted School Travel Program' 'public Passenger Service' 'taxi Cab Service' 'accredited Service Operator' 'taxi Fares' 'request for Tender' 'natural Justice']
['administrative Law' 'passenger Transport' 'government Procurement'] ['assisted School Travel Program' 'public Passenger Service' 'taxi Cab Service' 'accredited Service Operator' 'taxi Fares' 'request for Tender' 'natural Justice']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Summons Seeking Orders in the Nature of Certiorari and Mandamus and a Declaration Concerning Refusal to Amend a Request for Tender / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Department was entitled to appoint to its preferred list of service providers a person or entity other than an operator accredited under the Passenger Transport Act 1990 (NSW).' 'Whether the proposed Assisted School Travel Program was a public passenger service within the Passenger Transport Act 1990 (NSW).' 'Whether owners or operators of taxi-cabs were prevented from nominating a loaded kilometre rate in excess of the kilometre rate set pursuant to s 60A of the Passenger Transport Act 1990 (NSW).' 'Whether the Plaintiffs were entitled to the relief sought in the summons.']

Ratio Decidendi

Any engagement of transport service providers under the RFT would be by the Department of Education or selected students, not by anyone in the capacity of a member of the public. Carriage under the Assisted School Travel Program therefore did not constitute a public passenger service under the Passenger Transport Act 1990 (NSW), so providers did not need accreditation under that Act for the service. Because services under the RFT were not public passenger services, they were not taxi-cab services even if performed by taxi-cabs, and the Director-General's fare determination under s 60A did not limit the loaded kilometre rates tendered. The summons was dismissed.

Court Disposition

The summons is dismissed and the Plaintiffs are to pay the Defendants' costs.

Orders

  • ['The summons is dismissed.' "The Plaintiffs are to pay the Defendants' costs."]