clr/1988/1988_3_581.pdf

(1975)3C.L.R.548: Skaros v. TheRepublic

(1986)3C.L.R.2109. Recourse. Recourseagainstthedecisionoftherespondenttoimposethe 581 Federated Agencies v. L'ssol Municipality

(1988)sumof £ 600.- professional taxon theapplicant company. A. Drakos for the applicant. Y.Potamitis, for the respondent. Cur. adv. vult. LORIS J. read the following judgment. The applicant company impugns by meansof thepresentrecourse thedecision of the respondent Municipality dated 5.8.86, whereby £600.- professional licence was imposed on the applicants, for carrying on business for profit within theMunicipal limits of the respondent Municipality. The applicants a limited company duly registered in Cyprus were carrying on, at all material times, travel, tourist and insurance agency business, with amain office at Nicosia, keeping at the same time a permanent sub-office in Limassol Town, where they wereemploying more than 12employees. Applicants applied totherespondent Municipality pursuant to the provisions of s. 105

(1)of Law 111/85 (as amended) for the issueof aprofessional licencetothemfor theyear

1. The respondent Municipality imposed professional licence amounting to £600.- and notified applicants accordingly. It may be noted inthisconnection thatthemaximumprofessional licence envisaged bytheThird Schedule totheLawfor thecarrying onof business similar tothat of the applicants bycompanies of limited liability is£
2. Theapplicant feeling aggrieved filed thepresentrecoursechallenging the said imposition of £600.-professional licence fee imposed by the respondent, relying on several grounds set out intheir recourse which may be grouped together under two broad Heads: • 582 3 C.L.R. Federated Agencies v. L'ssol Municipality Loris J. (A)Failure tocarry out due inquiry resulting in material misconception astotheactual facts. (B)Discriminatory treatmentof theapplicants,and violationof theprinciples of fair administration. 5 Ishall proceed toexamine the complaints in theorder set out above: InRepublic v. Ekkeshis

(1975)3 C.L.R.548 the following were stated by theFull Bench of thisCourt atp.555: "Nodoubt,discretionary powers mustbeexercised without amisconception about amaterial fact. •— 10 ^ 20 25 30 If that happens, thedecision reached is contrary to law, in the sense that the law was applied on a wrong factual basis. On theother hand, thereexists apresumption that an administrativedecision isreached after acorrect ascertainment ofrelevant facts, though such presumption can be rebutted if a litigant succeeds in establishing that there exists at least a probability thatamisconception hasled tothetakingof thedecision complained of (See Stassinopoulos, Law of Administrative Acts,

(1951)304et seq.) .The burden of establishing that an administrative decision was reached on the basis of amisconception about amaterial fact, lieson theperson challenging the validity of such decision on this ground " Inthe instant case theapplicants, on whose shoulders the burden of proof lay, failed toestablish that the administrative decision inquestion wasreached aton thebasisofamisconception as to material facts. Imay even go further and say that the appplicants failed even toraise adoubt to mymind in this respect; and inthisconnection itiswell settled that "aprobability that themis: conception has led to the taking of the decision complained of is sufficient tovitiate an administrative act"(videSkarosv.TheRepublic

(1986)3 C.L.R. 2109 at p.2115). 583 Loris J. Federated Agencies v.L'ssol Municipality

(1988)Inthecircumstancesthecomplaintsgrouped under(A)above aredoomedtofailure. As regards complaints grouped under(B) above,it mustbe stated attheoutsetthattherelevantallegationsconnectedtherewith,arequitevagueanduncertain. 5 Mere reference by applicants to companies TUI' and 'SUN INSURANCEOFFICELTD*andtheamountofprofessional tax imposed on them for the year 1986,does not provide material sufficient for anysort ofcomparison; neitherthenatureandthe ratioofthebusinessoftheaforesaid companiesnoranyotherma- 10 terial incidental totheiractivities isanywhere mentioned inthe presentrecourse. Thustheapplicantsfailedeventoassertpositivelythediscriminationcompainedofinclearandsuccinctterms;furthermorethey failed toestablish anythingpointingtowardsthedirectionofthe 15 allegeddiscrimination ortheallegedviolationoftheprinciplesof fair administration. Fortheabovereasonsthecomplaintsoftheapplicantgrouped under"B"havetobedismissed,aswell. In the result present recourse fails and is accordingly dis- 20 missed.Lettherebenoorderastocosts. Recoursedismissed. Noorderasto costs. 584