Proportionality in Customs Broker licence revocation: revocation found excessive where misconduct was partial and regulatory breaches remained.

The document discusses judicial review of a Customs Broker licence revocation on proportionality grounds. Although the findings of breach under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations were not disturbed, the Court examined whether revocation was excessive in light of the nature and degree of misconduct. Applying the settled doctrine of proportionality, it noted that the broker had partly discharged its regulatory obligations and that complete revocation was too harsh on the facts. The Appellate Tribunal's interference with the revocation was treated as correct, while the remaining regulatory consequences were maintained.

---

---

Issues: Whether revocation of the Customs Broker licence was justified or whether, in the facts and circumstances, that punishment was disproportionate.

Analysis: The findings of breach of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations were not disturbed, and the only surviving question was the proportionality of the penalty of revocation. The Court applied the settled doctrine of proportionality in judicial review and considered whether the punishment was so harsh as to warrant interference. On the facts, the Customs Broker had discharged part, though not all, of its obligations under the regulatory framework, and revocation was viewed as excessive when tested against the nature and degree of misconduct. The Court held that the Appellate Tribunal had correctly interfered with the revocation while maintaining the other consequences.

Conclusion: The revocation of the Customs Broker licence was held to be disproportionate and unsustainable; the challenge to the Tribunal's order failed.

---