AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

.pert witnesses disagree in re case

14th March 1969, Page 51
14th March 1969
Page 51
Page 51, 14th March 1969 — .pert witnesses disagree in re case
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• What are body cords in radial tyres? In the absence of any accepted technical meaning Sheriff Paterson of Jedburgh has decided that they are the cords contained in the casing which form the "air envelope". He made this decision after studying the evidence in a case when Wm. Baxter and Sons Ltd. of Tranent was charged under the Motor Vehicle (Construction and Use) Regulations 1966 82(i) (c). This reads "the tyre has a break in its fabric or has a cut in excess of one inch or 10 per cent of the section width of the tyre, whichever is the greater, measured in any direction on the outside of the tyre and deep enough to reach the body cords."

An expert witness called for the Crown defined all cords as body cords; this included those immediately below the tread. The expert witness for Baxter contended that these cords were not body cords. The defendant suggested that as the regulations described cords in separate and distinct ways Parliament must have intended to indicate two different parts of the tyre.

To support this contention it was pointed out that regulation 82 (i) (e) reads: "the tyre has any portion of the ply or cord structure exposed".

The vehicle weighed 13; tons gross when stopped by the police and the 5in, long cut on the crown of the Michelin XY cover had penetrated to the first cord. Sheriff Paterson stated in his written decision that the cut had not rendered the tyre dangerous but had a foreign body penetrated the cut it may have caused tread separation.

Tags

People: Tranent, Paterson