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
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192 
Effort to Acquire Premises Fails
Page 59
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A CQUISITION of the haulage
business of Goddard and Dellar, Ltd., Royston, has, as the result of drastic action, been deferred by the Road Haulage Executive for a period of up to six months.
The company is well known as a main distributor for Perkins oil engines and Seddon and Guy vehicles, and is an expert in the maintenance of oil engines.
Ten vehicles are run on haulage, but the transport and retail sides of the btisin.ess are combined as a unit. Haulage represents 26 per cent. of the gross turnover.
The R.H.E. served a notice of acquisition and insisted upon taking over the premises. Thus, thecompany would have been left with its retailsales business, representing 74 per cent. of its gross turnover, but no headquarters from which to conduct it.
The company fought the Executive _ over the acquisition of the premises and the dispute reached a stage where, through its solicitors, Goddard and Dellar, Lid., informed the R.H.E. that on November 5, the proposed date of
acquisition, the vehicles __and their equipment, would be left outside the showrooms and workshops, and representatives of. the R.H.E.. would be refused admission to the premises.
This threat produced immediate action. The R.H.E. asked Goddard and Deflate Ltd., to apply for postponement of acquisition, and reluctantly the company decided to do so. The Executive has agreed to defer transfer for a period up to six months, so that a settlement of the dispute can be reached.
Where haulage is only part of a bushiess and, as in the-case of -Goddard and Dellar, Ltd., property is used for more than that activity, Section 45 of the Trans-port Act states that the property shall not be subject to acquisition " unless it is reasonably necessary for the purposes of the Commission." Thus, the B.T.C.' acts as sole arbiter and in this 'case the premises were strongly desired.
Legally, the B.T.C. was entitled to take them over, but whether such a deeisiOn would be just, having regard to the circurnstanceS, is an entirely different matter.