AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

'Appellants must face up to abstraction' Tribunal

19th July 1968, Page 40
19th July 1968
Page 40
Page 40, 19th July 1968 — 'Appellants must face up to abstraction' Tribunal
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?

• In written judgments issued this week, the Transport Tribunal has dismissed two appeals against decisions made by the North-Western deputy Licensing Authority.

Sutton and Sons (St. Helens) Ltd., was appealing against the grant to Heatons Transport (St. Helens) Ltd., of two additional A-licensed vehicles to carry "General goods; England and Wales" and six vehicles with conditions: "Goods for Rockware Group of companies as required," the vehicles formerly having been on Contract A licence (CM June 28 1968).

The appellants argued that eight extra vehicles would give rise to substantial abstraction of return loads-and that there had been a fall in work from the Rockware Group. The Tribunal said: "The possibility of abstraction is something which the appellants must face, particularly since the effect of the grant will not be to throw the whole capacity of the eight vehicles onto the return load market." There would be return loading from Rockware and the operation of a balanced service with a Hayes haulier would not place additional return loads on the market. The grant would enable the respondents to develop this balanced service, leaving them with some headroom for the expected increase beyond the one vehicle a night with which they wished to make a start, said the judgment.

The Transport Holding Company appealed against the grant to G. A. Chadwick and Son Ltd. of Halewood, near Liverpool, of the addition of 12 vehicles to its A licence, the vehicles formerly having been under a C-hiring arrangement with Jefferson Smurfit Packaging Ltd. The appellants argued that the return-load facility occasioned by the grant would result in abstraction from other hauliers.

It appeared to the Tribunal that the customer was entitled to say that he wished to surrender responsibility for his own transport to a public carrier and it was no answer to say that they should be content with their present C-hiring arrangements.

Tags

Organisations: Transport Tribunal
Locations: Liverpool

comments powered by Disqus