clr/1988/1988_3_1289.pdf

(6)(bj.'53

(7)(a)(b),53

(9)(a)(b)and 53

(11)—Certificates ofcompetencyasmaintenance-manofelectricalap­ pliancesFirstorSecondGrade—RegulatoryAdministrativeAct333183is­ suedbythe MinisterofCommunications and Works underReg. 53

(7)and

(9)(b)—Suchactsetoutthe maximumlimitsinrespectofpreparing plansandstudiesfor theoperation(maintenance)andinstallationofelectri­ calappliancesandequipment—LicensingAuthoritynotboundtograntthe maximum units—ThepurposeoftheMinister'sOrderwastoensure thatin theexerciseofitsdiscretion theAuthoritywillnotexceedsuchmaximum •' units—The extent of theactual restriction tobeimposedon thepersons concerneddependsontheirperformanceatexaminations-^-Theaforesaid RegulationsarenotultrayirestheElectricityLaw,Cap. 170,section 10(e) 11 φ(g)mdΜ ' ; t ' ; l* * ; ' Constitutional·Law—Right to exercise aprofession, trade or callingConstitution.Art. 25—Restriction of—TheElectricityRegulations,Regs. , r 53

(6)(a)(b),J3

(7)(a)(b),53

(9)(a)(b) and53(1lh-lmposerestrictions necessaryintheinterestsofpublicsafety,for theprotectionoftherightsof othersandinthepublicinterest—Therefore, theyarenotrepugnanttoArt. 25. 1289 Syndesmos Electrologon v. Republic

(1988)Thefactsofthiscaseappearsufficiently inthejudgmentoftheCourt Recoursedismissed. Noorderastocosts. Casesreferredto: TheBoardforRegistrationofArchitectsandCivilEngineersv. Kyriakides 5

(1966)3CUR.640; Apostotou v. TheRepublic

(1984)3C.L.R. 509; Policev, Hondrou, 3R.S.C.C.82. Recourse. Recourse against therefusal of therespondents togrant toap- ^Q plicants No.2 a Certificate of Competency as maintenance-man of electrical appliances. K. Tatarides, for the applicants. M. Tsiappa (Mrs.), for the respondents. Cur. adv. vult. 15 A. LOIZOU P. read the following judgment. Applicant 1, is the Association of theLicensed Electrical Contractors andit isa professional Association. The applicants who are listed in the Schedule attachedtotherecourse(hereinafter tobereferred toas applicants 2),aremembersofapplicant 1.Theobject of thelatter 20 istheprotection andpromotion oftheprofessional interestsofits members. Applicants 2 areduly registered asElectrical Contractors and/or as Maintenance-men for electrical appliances, First Grade and/or Maintenance-men forelectrical appliances, Second Grade. 25 By means of letters of their advocate dated 23rd December 1290 3 C.L.R. C.L.R. f> 10 , ,- 20 JU A.Loizou P. ·/ 1985, (Exhibits 2, 3 and 4, which was addressed to, the respon­ dentLicensing Authority, by virtue of theElectricity Regulations, the applicants sought to be furnished with Competency Certifi­ cates andRegistration Certificates inaccordancewith theOrderof theMinister of CorrimunicatiohsandWorks, dated 16thDecem­ ber 1983 (Regulatory Administrative Act 333/83). By meansof a further letter dated 22nd January 1988 (Exhibit 5 ) addressed to therespondentLicensing Authority, applicants 2sought tobe fur­ nished with CompetencyCertificates'and Registration Certificates asElectrical ContractorsofElectrical andMechanicalInstallations inaccordancewith thesaid Order 3 3 3 / 8 3 . . . . ; n Svndesmos Syndesmos Electroloson Electrologonv. v.Republic Republic ι . ι • i,; . -:. . ;JI?I · ,< 'J :n ι u- -n t;·. « {• By means of a letter dated 15th March, 1986, (see Exhibit 1, attachedtotherecourse) theDirectorof theDepartmentof Electri­ cal andMechanicalServices of theMinistry of Communications andWorks; rejected all theabove claims of applicants2.The said letter,so far relevant reads: '"'•'' "Under Regulations'53W(a)V.53

(6)"(a)and';53

(7)(a) for one to acquire a Certificate of Competencyas'maintenanceman of electrical'appliances he has to succeed in the correr *~ sponding examinations which are carried'out by theDepart­ ment. Thelimits of thecompetency of eachoneof thecandi­ dates are specified by theLicensing.Authority on thebasis of ' ihis performance' at these examinations, in exercise of the dis> cretionary power vested in theAuthority by virtue of Regula­ tion 53

(11)Having in mind theabove, Iregret toinform you thattheissuewithoutanexaminationof Certificates of Compe­ tenceascontractorsormaintenance-mentothepersonsnamed inyour said letters is not possible." 'As against4triedecision"embodied intheabove'lettef the'applicantsfiled thepresent recourse praying for adeclaration thatit is null andvioid andof nolegaleffect whatsoever. -. The grounds of law relied uponin support of therecourse are thefollowing: ' ' v" 1291 A. Loizou P. Syndesmos Electrologon v. Republic

(1)Thatthesubjudice decision was takenby a non-competent organ.

(2)That thesubjudice decision was theresult of a defective procedure.

(3)That the subjudice decision was taken in a mannercon- 5 trary tolaw andon thebasisof unascertained facts and/oris the productof insufficient inquiry.

(4)That the subjudice decision was taken in a manner con­ trary to theElectricity Regulations (1941 - 1976) and/orOrder 333/83.

(5)That the sub judice decision was taken in excessand/or abuse of powers. Before dealing any further with the submissions of learned counsel for theapplicants itis deemedpropertoquotehereinunder Regulations 53

(6)(a) (b),53

(7)(a) (b),and 53

(11), of the 15 Electricity Regulations 1976. Sofar as relevant they provide as follows: "53

(6)(a) Πρόσωπον τι δύναται να απόκτηση Πιστοποιητικόν ικανότητοςΣυντηρητούΗλεκτροσυσκευών (ΠρώτηςΤάξεως) εάν (iii) ικανοποίησητην Αρχήν Αδειων κατόπιν εξετάσεων, περίτην ικανότητακαιτεχνικαςγνώσεις αυτού. (β) Εγγεγραμμένος Συντηρητής Ηλεκτροσυσκευών (Πρώτης Τάξεως)δύναταινα αναλαμβάνητην ευθύνηντης 25 λειτουργίας συσκευών και εξοπλισμού χαμηλής και μέσης τάσεως εντός των υπό του Υπουργού Συγκοινωνιών και ΈργωνκαθορισΟησομένωνδιαδιατάγματοςορίων. 1292 10 3 C.L.R. Syndesmos Electrologon v. Republic A.Loizou P.

(7)(α)Πρόσωποντιδύναταινα αποκτήσειπιστοποιητι. κόν ικανότητοςΣυντηρητήΗλεκτροσυσκευών (Δευτέρας Τάξεως) εάν; 5 και

(11),ικανοποίησητηνΑρχήνΑδειών,κατόπιν εξετάσε­ ων, περίτην ικανότητακαι τεχνικάςγνώσειςαυτού. ..ι ρ (β) Εγγεγραμμένος ΣυντηρητήςΗλεκτροσυσκεών (Δευ­ τέρας Τάξεως)δύναταινααναλαμβάνητην ευθύνηντης λειτουργίαςσυσκευώνκαι εξοπλισμούχαμηλήςκαι μέσης τάσεως εντός τωνυπότουΥπουργούΣυγκοινωνιώνκαι Έργωνκαθορισθησομένων δια διατάγματοςορίων. 10

(9)(α)Πρόσωποντιδύναταινα απόκτησηπιστοποιητι­ κόνικανότητοςΕργολήπτουΗλεκτρικώνΕγκαταστάσεων εάν είναιεικοσιενόςτουλάχιστονετών, ,- * S L * 4 .·.·'.•..· ά) ώ»»' » :»» * „.:...»!.' :lr....::..i.i.:... Ι 20 25

(2)διατων επίτούτωδιενεργουμένων εξετάσεωνικα"νοποιήσητηνΑρχήνΑδειώνπερί την ικανότητα και,τας τεχνικόςγνώσειςαυτού. (β)Εγγεγραμμένος Εργολήπτης ΗλεκτρικώνΕγκατα­ στάσεων δύναται νααναλαμβάνη την ευθύνηνεποπτείας εκτελέσεωςεγκαταστάσεωςηλεκτρικώνσυσκευώνκαι εξοπλισμού χαμηλής και μέσης τάσεως εντός των υπό του ΥπουργούΣυγκοινωνιώνκαιΈργωνκαθορισθησομένων 6ια διατάγματοςορίων: 1293 A. Loizou P. Syndesmos Electrologon v. Republic

(11)Η Αρχή Αδειών κέκτηται διακριτικήν εξουσίαν όπωςπεριορίζηταπαρεχόμεναπιστοποιητικά ικανότητος, εις ειδικόντίνατύπον, μέγεθοςκαιτρόπον εγκαταστάσε­ ωςσυρμάτων,συσκευήςκαιεξοπλισμού. 5 Ο κάτοχοςόμως ούτωπεριορισθέντοςπιστοποιητικού δύναται μετά πάροδον δώδεκαμηνών απότης εκδόσεως αυτούναζητήσηόπωςεξετασθήδια τηνάρσιντωντοιού­ των περιορισμών." "53

(6)(a)Aperson mayobtain'acertificate of competency as maintenance- manof Electrical Appliances(FirstGrade) if- (i)' 10 .' (ii) (iii) satisfies theLicensing Authority through examinations abouthiscompetency andtechnicalknowledge. (b)AregisteredMaintenance- manof Electrical appliances (First Grade)may undertake theresponsibility for theopera­ tion of appliances andequipmentof low andmediumpressure within thelimits specified by anOrderof theMinisterofCom­ munications andWorks. 15 20 53

(7)(a)A person may obtain acertificate of competency asMaintenance- manof Electrical appliances (SecondGrade) if:

(1)(i) ("> ; 25

(2)(

1. i)and 1294 3 CX.R. Syndesmos Electrologon v. Republic ·' Ά -* r' . ' Λ$, .· ,i · , A. Loizou P. •• i' ';*, . *.ι· ..........( (*,'*** .",*/'*' (
2. ii)satisfies the Licensing Authority, through examinations abouthiscompetenceandtechnical knowledge. 5 (b)A registered Maintenance- manof Electrical appliances (SecondGrade),may undertaketheresponsibility of theoper­ ation of appliances and equipment of low and.medium pres-, sure within thelimits specified by anOrder of theMinister of CommunicationsandWorks. . ,. _ * J Ί I > .IL 10 53

(9)(a)A person may obtain acertificate of competency as Electrical Contractorif he is at least twenty -one years of age and,

(1)(

1. i)'. . (
2. ii)..... ^5 * •'•"· Ο") ' - ? '. r '· >) : • r''" t.. τ '-rrx? I ·: y - I ' l l . '•· · " ' • ' ' ' ,* and ,

(2)through the examinations carried out for the purpose satisfies theLicensing Authority abouthis competency and his ,, technicalknowledge. .. , . . . 2Q (b)A registered ElectricalContractormay undertaketheresponsibility.of supervision of theexecution of the installation of electrical.appliances.and.iequipment of low t and medium . pressure within thelimits specified by.an Order ,of theMinis­ terof CommunicationsandWorks: „ . ι _, ei ·: 25 .' y \ *T ' .. ' *' • · " . • . 53

(11)The Licensing Authority is vested with discretion..aiy'rjqwer to impose restrictions.in thecertificates of comoe*tency in.so far as the.size and the manner of installation of wires,theappliances andequipmentareconcerned. 1295 A.Loizou P. Syndesmos Electrologon v.Republic

(1988)Theholderofcertificate whichhasthusbeenrestrictedmay withintwelvemonthsofitsissueapplytobeexaminedforthe purposeofremovingtherestrictions.") BymeansofRegulatoryAdministrativeAct333/83,theMinisterof Communications andWorksactingundertheaforequoted 5 paragraph (b)of Regulations 53

(6),

(7)and

(9)specified asfollows:thelimitsinrespectoftheresponsibilityforpreparingplans and studies for the operation (maintenance) and installation of electricalappliancesandequipment. "Inrespectof maintenance- men(low andmediumpres- 10 sure): (a)FirstGrade350KVA(upto) (b)SecondGrade75 KVA(upto) InrespectofElectricalContractor: (a)Forinstallation(contracting) 100KVA(upto) (b)Preparingplansandstudies(restrictedlicence):25KVA (upto)." Learned counsel for theapplicants elaboratingon hisabove groundsof lawsubmittedthefollowinginhiswrittenaddress:

(1)Under theaforequoted Regulationsthecompetentauthori- 20 tytospecify thelimitswithinwhichtheaboveclassesofelectricians,canundertakeresponsibility,istheMinisterofCommunications andWorks,whobymeansofOrder333/83hasspecified thecorrespondinglimits.TheDirectorofE.M.S.relyingonRegulation 53

(11)restricts toagreaterextent thesaid limitsin the 25 caseofeachoneoftheapplicants.Suchacourse-thesubmission goes on,- runscontrary tothe saidRegulations.Further theLicensing Authority has noauthority,byvirtueof Regulation 53

(11)toreduce thelimits specified bytheMinister inrespectof 1296 3 C.L.R. Syndesmos Electrologon v. Republic A.Loizou P. eachprofessionalcategory.Andtherefore thedecisionwastaken byanoncompetentAuthority. - . ' · • " .

(2)ThatthesaidRegulationsandOrderareultravirestheenablingenactmentnamelyTheElectricityLaw,Cap. 170. ; ' 5" 10

(3)ThatthesaidRegulationsconstitutearestrictiontotheright of theexercise of theprofession of applicants and suchrestrictionswhichhavenotbeenplacedbyanenactmentbutbymeans ofRegulations'arenotnecessaryfor anyofthepurposesofArticle25

(2)oftheConstitution. Dealingfirstwithsubmission

(1),Ihavethesetosay: -Itisclearfrom thewordingoftheaforequoted Regulation53

(11)that the Licensing Authority is'vested with discretionary power toimposerestrictions onthecertificates ofcompetence.' And-itisalso,clearthattheextentof suchrestrictionsdepends 15 ontheperformanceofthecandidatesintheexaminations.Indeed inthecertificates ofcompetencyofalltheapplicantsrestrictions asenvisagedbymeansofRegulation53

(11)havebeenimposed. Havingregardtothewordingoftheaforequoted Regulations53

(6)(a)(b),7(a)(b),9(a)(b),-and53

(11)Iamoftheopinionthat 20 Order333/83doesnotentitletheapplicantsasofrighttothemaximumunitsspecified therein.TheaimofthesaidOrderisonlyto ensurethattheLicensingAuthorityintheexerciseofitsdiscretion under Regulation 53

(11)does notexceed the maximum limits specified intheOrderinrelationtoeachdifferent classofelectri25 cians.HaditbeenotherwiseanorderoftheMinisterundersubparagraph1^) of Regulation 53

(7)ana"

(9),would haverenderedmeaninglessthe;discretionarypoweroftheLicensingAuthoritytoimposerestrictionsunderRegulation53

(11). ForalltheabovereasonsIholdtheviewthatinadditiontothe 3Q qualifications named intheRegulations theothersolecriterion whichgovernsthegrantofcertificatesofcompetencyandtheextentoftherestrictionsimposedthereinistheperformanceofthe candidates intheexaminations. I,also,hold thatthecompetent * • · ' • " » * » 1297 • A.Loizou P. Syndesmos Electrologon v. Republic

(1988)authority forthegrantingof thesaidcertificates andtheimposition of therestrictionsistheLicensingAuthoritywhichisnotat allboundtograntacertificate ofcompetencywiththemaximum limitsspecified intheorderoftheMinister. Forallabovereasonscontention

(1)mustfail. 5 Coming now to thecontention about ultra vires, I must say thattheRegulationsinquestioncomeclearlywithinsection10(e) (f) (g) and(h) of theElectricity Law,Cap. 170.Therefore contention

(2)mustfail. Comingfinallytothecontentionabouttheinfringement ofAr- 10 tide 25oftheConstitution inthecaseofTheBoardforRegistrationof Architectsand Civil Engineers v.Kyriakides

(1966)3 C.L.R.640(F.B.)whichdealtwiththequalifications for theregistrationofarchitectsandcivilengineersthefollowingweresaid atpp.658-659: 15 "Thequestionwhichfalls fordetermination is,dotheconditionsorrestrictionsprescribedbysection7conflict withthe provisionsofArticle25

(2)oftheConstitution?Havingregard to whathasbeen stated above,with regard to qualifications usuallyrequiredwearesatisfied thattheconditionsorrestric- 20 tions laiddowninsection7relateexclusivelytoqualifications usuallyrequiredfortheexerciseoftheprofession ofanarchitect;andwearealsosatisfied thattheyarenecessaryintheinterestsofpublic safety,fortheprotectionoftherightsofothers and in the public interest. We, therefore, hold that the 25 provisionsofsection7arenotunconstitutional." Also in Apostolou v. The Republic

(1984)3 C.L.R. 509 (F.B.),Ihadthesetosayatp.524: "Ithasbeenurgedthattheburdenimposedontheself-employedbytheLawandtheRegulationsbythepaymentofthe 30 contributionssetoutthereinissuchthatitreachesthelimitsof aprohibitionorarestriction impermissibleandcontrarytoAr1298 3 C.L.R. 5 1 0 1 - 20 25 Syndesmos Electrologon v. Republic A. LoizouP. tide25of theConstitution. ItisawellsettledprinciplethatAr­ ticle25oftheConstitutionprotectstherighttoexerciseapro­ fession ortocarry onany occupation,tradeorbusiness, from directandnotindirectrestrictions'orinterference.Ampleauthoritycanbefoundinteraliainthefollowingcases,ThePo­ liceandLiveras\i R.S.C.C.pp.65 -eiyPsaras^v. The Re­ public,

(1968)3C.L.R. 363,364;Antoniades andOthers v. The Republic

(1979)3 C.t/.R.641?659; loannis Voyias v. The Republic

(1974)3C.L.R.p.390,413;ImpalexAgencies Λ Ltd'. ;v.The Republic

(1970)3 C.L.R. 361;and Antoniades case (supra)atp.655. Without acceptingthatthesaidimpositions areof a nature thatcouldbeconsidered-asrestrictive to"ofprohibitive ofthe exerciseof theapplicants profession,or^trade, yet Ihaveno difficulty inarrivingattheconclusion, inthelightoftheafore­ mentionedauthoritiesthatthisgroundshouldalsofail." , Inview of the above case -law Ihold thattherestrictions whichhavebeenimposedby meansoftheaforesaid Regulations arenecessary intheinterestof publicsafety,fortheprotectionof therightsof othersandlnthepublicinterest!They thereforedo notviolate Anicle 25

(2)of,the Constitution. Imust say further thattthefact thatthe.restrictionsto.therightsafeguarded by Article 25of theConstitutionhavebeenimposedby.meansofsubsidiary legislation andnotby meansof legislation of theHouseofRepre­ sentatives, does notmake any difference. '{See Policev. Hondrou, 3 R.S.C.C. 82.) Forall theabovereasons therecoursemustfail andis hereby dismissedwith noorderas tocosts. 30 . ί * j •' 1299 Recoursedismissed. ·.·-'» N0 orderas to costs.