THE LATEST NEWS OF IMPORTANT EVENTS
Page 61
Page 62
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
CONTRACT OPERATORS TO KEEP RECORDS OF JOURNEYS.
A"portant Government amendment to Clause 23 of the Road Traffic Bill, requiring records of journeys to be kept in connection with contract-carriage work, was agreed to during the third reading of the measure last Friday. Col. Headlam, Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport, said that the amendment had been specifically provided to allay the fears of the industry.
Under the amendment, the operator must prepare a record containing particulars of each journey made on contract work, but the details need not include fares. The driver must carry a work ticket, containing, information from which the record of the journey may be identified. He shall, on demand by a police constable in uniform or by a person authorized by the Traffic Commissioners, produce the work ticket for inspection.
The record of each journey must be preserved for six months and shall, if required at any time, be produced for inspection by any person authorized by the Traffic Commissioners.
COLOUR OF VEHICLE AS GROUND FOR OBJECTION.
A UNIQUE objection was raised by
Southdown Motor Services, Ltd., to an application for an excursion and tours licence by Mr. T. Lower, of Brighton, at a sitting of the South Eastern Traffic Commissioners, a few days ago. The Southdown concern opposed on the ground that Mr. Lower's vehicle was of the same colour as the Southdown coaches.
Mr. C. W. Bromley, of Folkestone, the former owner of Mr. Lower's coach, said that the colour and writing display had always remained the same, and passengers could easily distinguish the vehicle from a Southdown coach. An undertaking was given, however, to make an effort to alter the colour when the vehicle was due for repainting, and the Southdown concern withdrew.
TILLING'S £3,000,000 CLAIM : BOARD OFFERS £1,030,000.
WHEN, on Monday last, the LonV/ don Passenger Transport Arbitration Tribunal resumed the hearing of the claim of Thomas Tilling, Ltd., for over £3,000,000 in compensation for the transfer of ifs metropolitan undertaking to the London Passenger Transport Board, Mr. Frank Pick, vicechairman of the Board, gave evidence. He stated that Thomas Tilling. Ltd., did not own garages in London, these being leased from the London General Omnibus Co., Ltd. This circumstance created a complication which did not obtain in the case of the other private undertakings.
Mr. Pick, on behalf of the Board, made a formal offer to Thomas Tilling, Ltd., of £1,032,221 of A, B and C stock, the market value of which, on May 29 last, was £1,073,578. In the NEW TROLLEYBUS SERVICE,
ST. HELENS Corporation inaugurated, on Monday, a five-minute service of trolleybuses from St. Helens, through Rainhill to Prescot.
COMMISSIONERS AND PRIVATE AGREEMENTS.
CARDIFF Corporation objected before the South Wales Commissioners to an extension of one of Newport Corporation's bus services to Tredegar Park, a Newport municipal playground some 400 yds. beyond the borough boundary. The Newport authority did not propose to make any extra charge for the additional 400 yds.
The Cardiff objection was based on an agreement made in 1922 between Cardiff and Newport Councils, under which Cardiff pays £150 per annum for the right to run buses over part of the Newport area. Cardiff now claimed that its buses should and could carry people to and from this park. If Newport made no extra charge, there would be a reduction of patronage of Cardiff's buses, and a revision of the annual fee payable to Newport should result.
Mr. A. T. James, K.C., chairman, said the application was reasonable and Would be granted. With regard to the agreement, the Commissioners had no urisdktion to interfere. ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL'S DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL.
TillE Court of Appeal, consisting of 1 Lords Justices Scrutton, Greer and Mangham, on Monday gave judgment on the appeal brought to decide whether the London Passenger Transport Board was obliged to take over the garage used to accommodate the six buses of the Chocolate Express Omnibus Co., Ltd., as part of the bus company's undertaking, under the London Passenger Transport Act, 1933, The garage was acquired in 1929 by Mr. A. G. Partridge, a director and chairman of the bus company. He spent money on alterations to enable the company's buses to be accommodated, and the concern gave him an undertaking with regard to rent and other matters.
The Board contended that the garage formed no part of the company's property which it was obliged to take over. The company appealed against the decision of the Arbitration Tribunal in favour of the Board.
Lord Justice Scrutton, in giving judgment, said the Court of Appeal was the final tribunal of appeal from the Arbitration Tribunal, and the present was the first appeal. There were about a dozen cases which might be affected by this decision. There was one question of principle which might be affected by the decision, but the facts of the 12 cases were likely to be quite different.
The first decision of the Arbitration Tribunal was that no property acquired by the company after the passing of the Act passed under the Act to the Board. In his lordship's opinion this decision was too widely expressed: The first finding of the Tribunal should be modified by the insertion of the words, after the passing of the Act, "which is not justified under Section 82, to msintain the undertaking until the appointed day in the ordinary course of business in an efficient condition as usual."
With regard to the second finding of
the Tribunal, that no rights or liabilities under the agreement or lease entered into after the passing of the Act passed to the Board, his lordship was of opinion that the agreement and lease were clearly ineffective. The terms of these documents were not necessary to maintain the undertaking in its usual efficiency until the appointed day.
The third finding of the Tribunal, that the arrangement recorded in the company's minutes of January, 1929, did not create any agreement and, even if such an agreement was created, it did not constitute a part of the undertaking within the meaning of the Act, was, his lordship thought, correct.
The answer to the question stated in the special case for the opinion of the Court would be that, with the amendments he had specified, the Tribunal came to a right decision in law., The other Lords Justices agreed. 160 APPEALS IN BIG YORKS CO-ORDINATION SCHEME.
1.--NN Thursday of last week, Sir Henry
Wynne commenced to hear a group of 160 appeals by the West Yorkshire Road Car Co., Ltd., Yorkshire Traction Co., Ltd., Hebble Motor Services, Ltd., Wood Brothers (Blackpool), Ltd., Walker, Taylor and Sons, Ltd., W. Armitage and Sons, Ltd., Ribble Motor Services. Ltd., and Yorkshire (W.D.) Electric Tramways, Ltd., against decisions of the Yorkshire and North-western Traffic Commissioners.
The appeals related to the big coordination scheme of these eight companies, under which it was estimated that 100,000 vehicle-miles would be saved per annum on services from Yorkshire to Lancashire, notably to Blackpool.
Mr. E. S. Herbert, on behalf of the appellants, said that the Commissioners had not stated their precise reasons for objecting to the scheme. Amongst the opponents to the appeal were Messrs. Hanson, Messrs. Bulloch and R. Barr (Leeds), Ltd.
The representative of one of the objectors claimed that Mr. Herbert was introducing material that was not discussed before the Commissioners at the hearing and was beyond the present knowledge of the objectors' legal representatives. Mr. Herbert replied that he was merely endeavouring to explain the events leading up to the present • position.
STATION RENT TO BE RAISED?
AORECAMBE Corporation is seekaling to raise from 2600 to 2800 a year, the rental paid by Ribble Motor Services. Ltd., for the use of Poulton Hall bus station. The increase is proposed to be made as the result of improvements which the corporation has effected in the premises. M.T. CO.'S THIRD APPEAL ON PICKING-UP POINTS.
THE third round of a protracted contest between the M.T. Co. (Motor Coaches), Ltd., London, S.E.14, and the East Kent Road Car Co., Ltd., and the South Eastern and Metropolitan Traffic Commissioners commenced on June 27. The M.T. Co. appealed against the refusal of certain pickingup points and against the grant of them to the East Kent Road Car Co., Ltd., whilst counter appeals were lodged by the East Kent concern.
• The appeal was heard by Mr, J. S.
Oxley, and Mr. Percy Idle, for the M.T. Co., reviewed at length the proceedings at the hearing of the previous application to the South-Eastern Corn. missioners. Mr. Oxley made it clear that the inquiry could not be converted into an appeal against the Minister's previous decisions, which were, he stated, "judicially closed."
A question arose as to the represen tations made to the Minister on the previous appeal by members of the public, concerning the lack of facilities for travel from Lenham to London, comparable with those provided by the M.T. Co. Mr. F. A. Flu, a director of that concern, stated that this was not the result of any activity on his company's part, and was probably the outcome of action by the Member of Parliament. Mr. Oxley said it Was a suggestion of improper pressure, but this was denied.
One or two sharp comments were made by Mr. Oxley on statements by Mr. Idle. The latter suggested that the Road Traffic Act, 1930, envisaged the existence of a licence before any backing could be granted. He claimed that there was a mass of new evidence and changed circumstances which the Commissioners had ignored.
The case was continued on Wednesday last.