The High Court upheld Land Transport’s decision to revoke Bipendra Dheeraj Ram’s goods transport service licence with overdue road user charges totalling some one million dollars owed by his transport company Rams Logistics Ltd. Inland Revenue subsequently forced his company into liquidation for unpaid tax debts.
The High Court was told of Mr Ram unable to get bank refinancing for his Auckland business at a time when Rams Logistics was cheating on its road user charge payments and also fending off Inland Revenue with a promise his company would pay $100,000 per month in reduction of tax debts.
In court, Mr Ram was described as among the worst offenders for non-payment of road user charges.
Evidence was given of a 2023 Land Transport investigation finding a shortfall in payment of road user charges for 39 of Rams Logistics 52 vehicle fleet.
Mr Ram promised to better manage fleet records and make good excess charges owed of $760,000 with instalment payments of at least $25,000 per month.
A follow-up investigation found underpayments of over $108,000 on another four trucks, together with a further failure to properly account for road user charges on some of the 39 trucks previously inspected.
In December 2024, Land Transport warned Rams Logistics it was at risk of losing its transport service licence.
Land Transport required new management be installed, capable of properly managing the business.
Mr Ram pleaded for time; he was doing all he could to remedy the problems, he said.
Three weeks later, Land Transport revoked Rams licence, stating Mr Ram was not a ‘fit and proper’ person to run a transport business.
He challenged this decision in the High Court, stating he had not been given the opportunity to answer allegations raised by Land Transport.
High Court judicial review enables citizens to challenge decisions made by state officials. If state power has not been exercised ‘in compliance with the law, fairly and reasonably,’ then government decisions can be overturned.
In its covering letter advising cancellation, Land Transport set out its version of mismanagement within Rams Logistics, without first giving Mr Ram a chance to challenge some of these assumptions, Justice Jagose said.
But these disputed issues were only a small part of the overall picture previously put to Mr Ram requiring remedy, he ruled.
Mr Ram had been given every opportunity to respond to the main issues raised by Land Transport prior to cancellation, Justice Jagose ruled.
Rams Logistics Ltd v. Land Transport – High Court (27.03.25)
25.092