(1988)1988June28 [A.LOEOU.p.] INTHEMATTEROFARTICLE146OFTHECONSTITUTION IOANNISANASTASSIOU, Applicant, v. THEREPUBLICOFCYPRUS,THROUGH THEMINISTEROFFINANCE, Respondent. (CaseNo.583/87). Customs andExcise Duties—Dutyfree importation ofcarsfor invalidpersons—Whetheradministrationentitledtotakeintoconsiderationareportby theSeniorTechnicalExaminer—Questiondeterminedintheaffirmative— Indeed, thereisnoobjection totheadministrationonitsownfreewillto submititsdiscretiontoformsorlimitations(notprovidedfor bythelaw), asachoiceofmeanstoformanopinion. ThefactsofthiscaseappearsufficientlyintheJudgmentoftheCourt Recoursedismissed. Noorderas tocosts. Casesreferredto: 10 mitiadousv. TheRepublic
(1983)3C.L.R.590; Markidesv.TheRepublic
(1985)3C.L.R. 1393; Kalliv.TheRepublic
(1984)3CJ-.R.443; 1300 3C.L.R. Anastassiou v.Republic Floridesv. TheRepublic
(1987)3C.L.R. 1770; Tooulisv. TheRepublic
(1985)3CJL.R.2478. Recourse. 5 Recourseagainstthedecision oftherespondentrejectingapplicant's application for theimportation of aduty free car for disabled persons. ' . A. Scordis, for the applicant. D. Papadopoulou (Mrs.),for the respondent. > " • > ' . - · Cur. adv. vult. 0 A. LOIZOU P. read the following judgment. By the present recoursetheapplicant seeksadeclaration of theCourtthatthedecisionof therespondent bywhichhisapplicationfortheimportation of a duty free car for disabled persons was rejected is null andvoidandof nolegaleffect whatsoever. 5 The applicant applied originally on the 3rd December 1984, butthatapplication wasrefused on the 17thMay, 1985.Thatdecision was the subject of Recourse No.624/85 by which the saidactwasannulledontheground thatithadbeen takenbyanorgan havingnocompetenceinthematter. Q Theapplication of theapplicant made under theprovisionsof Class 01.09 of the Fourth Schedule of the Customs Duties and Excise Laws 1978 - 1979, was accompanied by a certificate of Dr.Tourvas,Orthopaedic Surgeon, atPaphosHospital. According to it the applicant had been under his care for the last three years due to progressive deterioration of his arthritis in both shoulderjoints; that he had been operated in August 1982,and the right shoulderjoint was replaced with an artificial one, and thattheconditionoftheleft shoulderjointwasrapidly deterioratinganditwasadvisable,accordingtothisdoctortohavethejoint - 1301 A.Loizou P. Anastassiou v.Republic
(1988)oftheleft shoulderreplaced.Thereportconcludesasfollows: "Mr.Anastasihasseveredisabilityof bothupperlimbsand is unable to do any manual work. Driving car with manual gearboxandwithoutpowersteeringisdifficult, dangerousand detrimental tothestability oftheartificialjoint of hisshoul- 5 der." TheapplicantwasthenexaminedbyaMedicalBoardconsisting of Dr. Savvides, a Senior Specialist Orthopaedic Surgeon, Dr. Papanastassiou, Senior Specialist Surgeon and Dr. P. Eliades, Principal Medical Officer Nicosia.Their report dated the 27thJanuary 1987,isappendedtotheOpposition.After referring tothemedicalhistory of theapplicant which isalongthesame linesasthatof hisdoctorinPaphos,itconcludesbysayingthat the movement of his right shoulder is restricted to 25%of the normal andconsiderably painful. Thatthemovementofthe left shoulder isrestrictedto 25%of the normal and considerably, painful sothepatient has greatdifficulty with the usualmovements, as for example,when pressing himself. During the last seven monthshestartedcomplainingfor painsandnumbnessin theleft lowerlimb.His strengthinbothupperlimbsisreduced by20%thereisgripbutreduced.Bothlowerlimbsarenormal. The applicant was thenreferredto Mr. Eracleous, a Senior TechnicalExaninerintheoffice ofTransportBranchofExaminersforDrivers.Hisreportdatedthe22ndMay,1987,addressed totheDirectorof Customswasthatonthebasisofthereportof theMedicalBoard,datedthe27thMarch, 1987,heexaminedthe applicantandascertainedthathisphysicalconditionpermitshim todriveavehiclewithoutanyrestriction. Onthebasisofthismaterialtherespondentsinformed theapplicantthatafteracompetentexaminationithadbeenascertained thathisphysical condition did notjustify theuseof aspecially constructedvehicle,suitableforinvalidpersonsandthereforehis applicationcouldnotbemet 1302 10 15 20 3 C.L.R. Anastassiou v. Republic A.Loizou P. Itis thecasefor theapplicantthatinaccordancewiththemedicalopinionby driving amotor-carwithmanualgear - box.and without power -steering causes difficulties tothe applicant is dangerous and.affects the stability of the artificial joint onhis 5 right shoulder.Itwas argued thatinreachingthesubjudicedeci sion therespondents,contrary to the statutory provisions contained.in Class 01.09 tookintoconsiderationtheopinionarid or relied on theopinionof anorgan having nocompetenceinthe matterinreachingit.namelythatoftheSeniorTechnicalExaminQ er..Learnedcounselreliedfor thatpropositiontothecases,ofStylianosMiltiadous v.fhe Republic
(1983)3 C.L.R. 590; Costas PapakyriakouMarkidesV. The.Repubiic
(1985)3C.L.R. 1393; andKallisKalli v.TheRepublic
(1984)3C.L.R.443. ' 5' ο 25 30 Ihadtheoccasiontodealwithtthisissueinthe,caseofAndreas Florides v.TheRepublic,
(1987)3 C.L.R. 1770,in which Iex tensively dealtwithall aspectsofthecase.I abidebythatdecision asIhavenotbeenpersuadedthatIshoulddepartfrom it. Suffice ittoquoteheretherelevantpassagefrom thecaseofMarkides v. The Republic
(1985)3C.L.R. 1393,where atp. 1399 Ihadthis ά Ύ..".. "Whatever thelegal position is where thereis nointerfer encewith theexercise of administrativediscretionbyaperson ororganhaving nocompetenceinthematterunderthe relevant legislation, thereis,undertheGeneralPrinciplesof Adminis trativeLaw,noobjection totheadministrativeonitsown free willtosubject itsadministrativeonitsownfree willtosubject itsadministrative discretiontoforms andlimitations,not im posedandnotprovidedforby thelaw,asachoiceof means to form anopinion.In suchacasewhatitcannotdothereafter is to ignore arbitrarity such opinions as same wouldconstitute proof of inconsistentandarbitrary andtherefore wrong exer ciseof discretionary power.Thecompetentadministrativeor ganmay,however, dosoby givingreasonsforthat. Thoughit may be said thatin thepresentcase therewas, nothing to suggest clearly thattherespondentMinisterwafc 1303 A.Loizou P. Anastassiou v.Republic
(1988)bindinghimself toaccepttheopinionoftheSeniorTechnical Examineretc.,yetitwasintheformoffurther opinionandas partofthewiderinquirycarriedoutbyhiminthematter.Itis obviousthattheascertainmentoftheextentofinvalidityofa personisnotenough.Ithastobecorrelatedtotheinterference 5 withsafedrivingandtherequirementofanyadaptationthata vehicleneedtomeetsame(seeMiltiadoucase
(1983)3C.L.R. 590).Suchself-bindingoftheadministration,isnotcontrary totheGeneralPrinciplesofAdministrativeLaw.(SeeStassinopoulos,theLaw of Administrative Acts, 1951,p.333. Con- ,( slusions from the Case Lawof the Greek Council of State, 1929- 1959,p. 193and Decisions of theGreek Council of State738/1933,934/1933, 1062/1951." Theaforesaid approach wasalsoadoptedbySavvides,J., in thecaseofTooulisv.TheRepublic
(1985)3C.L.R.2478. j Forall theabovereasonstherecourseisdismissed butinthe circumstancestherewillbenoorderastocosts. Recoursedismissed. Noorderastocosts. 1304