liree men in book is legal
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
:LAIM that a haulage opera, Browns of Wem, Shropre, broke the law, when they ued a driver with a record 3k which had been used by o previous drivers, was )cted by three judges in the jh Court in London last week. Mr Justice Griffiths, sitting in ; Queen's Bench Divisional urt, said that neither the 168 Transport Act nor EEC )ulations contained a clear ligation upon road hauliers to ue an unused book to every ver they employed.
"There is no doubt that there a formidable lawyer's argumt in favour of the view that ;h driver should be given a sh book. But one has to bear mind that these regulations ve to be read and understood road hauliers and if there is ;.h an obligation it should be arly stated," said the judge. Lord Lane (Lord Chief Juse) and Mr Justice Webster reed in dismissing an appeal. by an inspector of the West Midlands Goods Vehicle Licensing Authority against a decision of Wem, Shropshire, magistrates on February 13, 1978, acquitting Browns of failing to issue a book in accordance with the regulations.
Giving judgment, Mr Justice Griffiths said each book contained 50 daily sheets in duplicate and a corresponding number of weekly report sheets. "Clearly its cost cannot be minimal and I can see no sensible reason why the book should not be reissued to another driver so he can use the remaining daily sheets and weekly reports," said the judge.
On the agreed facts of the case, Browns had apparently breached the regulations by reissuing the record book within 12 months of its surrender by the previous driver, but no proceedings had been taken against them on that ground, he said.