Larrow appeal dismissed
Page 32
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• The Transport Tribunal's written decision this week upheld the decision of Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon, Northern L.A. to refuse Larrow Transport (Northern) Ltd. an additional vehicle on A licence (CM October 10).
The Tribunal noted that the original licence, issued in May 1966, had 10 vehicles specified on it. On March 6 1969 the LA varied the appellant's licence by deleting a vehicle recently repossessed by a finance company. On March 5 1969 Larrow applied to vary its licence by substituting the vehicle that was to be deleted on March 6 by another vehicle of the same unladen weight, to be acquired. This was under S. 176(21(c) of the 1968 Road Traffic Act, which the LA is bound to grant. Also on March 5 another application for a short-term licence for a specified vehicle was submitted, this vehicle being the temporary replacement of the repossessed vehicle. Both these applications were received by the LA on March 7.
The Tribunal said the LA refused to consider this application under S.1 76)2))c), but treated it as an application for additional tonnage and refused it. The Tribunal ruled that the LA was correct in not considering it under S.176 for when the LA received the application the repossessed vehicle was no longer specified on the licence.
Referring to the application for the addition of a vehicle to be acquired, the Tribunal noted that the only supporting witness was Mr. Abraham Davis, a Larrow director, and said his evidence "was not only -bald but somewhat unconvincing".