1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148 
Due diligence
Page 38
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Monmouth magistrates gave T D (Brynantrnan) an absolute discharge after it pleaded guilty to using a vehicle with an insecure load.
The court was told that while one of the company's artics was negotiating a roundabout on the A40 dual carriageway last November, one of the three steel coils being carried came off the trailer. It was said that the three coils, weighing 22 tonnes, had been secured by sheets and 12mmdiameter rope which were alleged to be inadequate.
Defending, Stephen Kirkbright said the vehicle had been loaded by British Steel Corporation at Port Talbot. Each coil was loaded on a wooden cradle. The coils did not touch the bed of the trailer, but were attached to the cradle by metal hands. The load was then roped and sheeted by BSC staff.
The company had been carrying about 150 similar loads a year for eight years without any problems, said Kirkbright.
He referred to the decision of the High Court in the case of Hart vs Bex, in which it was said that where a defendant was morally blameless for an offence, an absolute discharge was appropriate.
6 I