Trade-plate Defence Succeeds
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN important case concerning the use of general trade plates was won IT the Steel Barrel Co., Ltd., Uxbridge, at Uxbridge, last Friday, when Middlesex County Council prosecuted the company under Section 4 of Article D of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations, 1924.
The company denied the contention of the prosecution that it was using a lorry for the delivery of goods to customers in a way that was not permitted under a general trade licence. The magistrates dismissed the summonses with 10 guineas costs and agreed to state a case. It was pointed out during evidence that a similar case had 1 eon dismissed by the Lord Mayor of London at the Mansion House..
Mr. W. A. Tookey, the well-known engineer, said that he examined the goods in the lorry on a certain date, and most of them he considered not to be likely to be used in the manufacturing or repair of a motor vehicle.
In evidence, Mr. H. R. Hood Bans, managing director of the Steel Barrel concern, as well as of G: Scarnmell and Nephew, Ltd., and Carrimore Six Wheelers, Ltd., made allegations of persecution by the police during 1933 and 1934. He thought the time had come when the company might be allowed to conduct its business in peace. It was submitted that the company was making bona fide use of the vehicle under trade plates and, even if it were making courtesy deliveries to customers, it was within its rights as a manufacturer, repairer and dealer in mechanically propelled vehicles. This contention was upheld by the Bench.