AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Vehicle Distribution Scheme "Not in Public Interest"

30th December 1960
Page 25
Page 25, 30th December 1960 — Vehicle Distribution Scheme "Not in Public Interest"
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?

I T is unlikely that the decision of the Restrictive Practices Conn against the motor vehicle distribution scheme will make any noticeable difference, so far as operators are concerned. The agreement in any case refers only to vehicles up to three tons 'unladen weight, and to small vans based on private car designs.

In a statement, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders said: " The effect of the decision is that manufacturers can no longer mutually agree to follow the policies set out in the vehicle distribution scheme agreement. So far as agreements between individual manufacturers and their franchised dealers are concerned, however, they remain in operation. The decision does not affect the right of individual manufacturers to continue to operate their present policies and it in no way affects the retail prices of motor vehicles."

The Restrictive, Practices Court declared the agreement contrary to the public interest. Accordingly the agreement was void. added Mr. Justice

'Diplock, who presided at the Court's eighteen-day hearing which ended on December 9.

Ordering the respondents to pay 3,000 guineas towards the costs of the Registrar, Mr. Justice Diplock said they had been' "guilty of unreasonable conduct" in relation to the discovery of documents and tactics' in relation thereto. both before and during the hearing of this case.

"It has increased the costs, prolonged the case and put some of the witnesses in a very embarrassing position indeed," he went on.

Mr. Justice Diplock in the judgment. said the respondents were some 65 in number. " It is a. regrettable and, fortunately, unprecedented feature of the present reference that those responsible for the preparation and presentation of the respondents' casehave from the outset endeavoured to avoid disclosing to this Court the circumstances in which the distribution scheme agreement was made," said Mr. Justice Diplock.


comments powered by Disqus