AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Walker Case as Yardstick

30th May 1947, Page 29
30th May 1947
Page 29
Page 29, 30th May 1947 — Walker Case as Yardstick
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?

ON Wednesday and Thursday of last week, the Appeal Tribunal heard appeals by five hauliers against the grant of licences to a company stated to have been purely a clearing house before 1945. The Western Licensing Authority had granted an A licence for seven vehicles totalling 16 tons 15 cwt. (including three t a be acquired, two of which would be tippers) and a B licence for two vehicles totalling 5 tons 11 cwt.

Decision was reserved by the Appeal Tribunal, third member of which was Col. E. Beddington-Behrens, M.C., Ph.D.

Reference was made to the principles of the Walker case (" The Commercial Motor," May 2) both by Mr. F. A. Stockdale, for the appellants, and Mr.

C. F. Ingle, for the respondent. The appellants were the Bristol Haulage Co., Ltd., Messrs. Knee Bros., Messrs. Edward Carter Marsh, Henry Russett and Sons, Ltd., and F. A. Baylis, Ltd. Respondent was A. Packhain and Co., Ltd., Clevedon.

Businesses Purchased The ease was one in which the company held an A defence permit for four lorries, obtained by buying up T. C. Binding and Sons, Ltd., and Yatton Haulage Co. Ltd. The Yatton company also yielded two vehicles operating under a B defence permit. Six additional vehicles, it was stated in the application, were needed to meet an increasing demand in the Clevedon district.

Five should be tippers. The haulier objectors were tipping specialists and were working for some of the applicant's customers.

In the appeal against the grant of a total of nine vehicles, the case for the appellants was that the evidence did not justify the grant of three extra vehicles, that the fleet had not been fully employed, and that there was a possibility of a dual grant, because the operator ran a clearing house. No objection was maintained to the B licence, it being confined to agricultural and livestock work.

Not Fully Employed ?

Detailed figures were quoted by Mr. Stockdale, in an attempt to show that there had not been full employment for six vehicles in a recent period of a year. Vehicles were not showing a profit in some cases, it was submitted.

The stated need for the extra vehicles, it was suggested, was based on scanty evidence from various concerns. There had been no witnesses and no letters in the case of one of them. Others mentioned small tonnages required.

There had been one informal letter from the Coniger Quarry, without great detail, and a representative of Black Rock Quarry had become tired of wait ing at court and had left. Evidence given by the Clevedon surveyor, referring to council work, had. been hearsay. His clerk was responsible for transport.

Other operators had facilities to offer and had tippers, but had not been employed. Transport facilities were more than adequate, Mr. Stockdale declared. On the strength of the figures given, appellants felt that there was not compliance with the principles laid down by the Tribunal in the Walker case.

Mr. Gleeson Robinson asked: "Can you say these figures indicate wasteful competition"?

For the respondent, Mr. Ingle said that the company's circumstances did comply with the principles of the Walker decision. The burden of proof was shifted to the appellants. Would it be held against the respondent company that it had had some idle times because of repairs and reconditioning, etc.? These vehicles, whenever possible, had been fully employed.

As a result of the take-over, vehicles had been earning more consistently towards the end of the period, as could be seen from Mr. Stockdale's own figures. If all the "vehicles could have been made serviceable, they would all have been employed. .

As to the question of a dual grant, any lsaulier who sub-contracted was in effect a clearing house, and there should not be any query in this case.

"Changing Need" The Bristol Haulage Co., Ltd., Mr. Ingle said, was about to convert some vehicles to tippers. " This indicated a

need. The chairman said: "Ii is a changing need." The character of the work, he suggested, had changed.

Referring to a £39,000 housing programme for Clevedon, Mr. Ingle said that big demands were arising, and would continue to develop.

The two existing B-licence vehicles, to which no objection was being raised, were purely for agricultural and livestock work, and the right to carry building materials had been given up. As to the A licence, the company was the right concern to meet local needs. It had put the former operators' house in order and other people evidently feared its competition, now that it was efficient.


comments powered by Disqus