AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

APPEAL TRIBUNAL HAS OPEN MIND.

12th March 1937, Page 32
12th March 1937
Page 32
Page 32, 12th March 1937 — APPEAL TRIBUNAL HAS OPEN MIND.
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?

A sidelight on the work of the Appeal Tribunal was afforded during an appeal hearing, at York; last week.

When Mr. F. G. Bibbings, Yorkshire Area secretary of A.R.0„ appearing for art appellant, was about to refer to the previous proceedings before the Licensing Authority, he used the phrase "as you know," Whereupon the chairman (Mr. Rowand Harker. K.C) interrupted with the 'remark : We do 'not know. We never hear any of the evidence before hearing the case. All we know of are the documents relating to the notice of appeal.'

Mr. BibbMgs: " I thought the Tribunal had read through the shorthand note beforehand."

The chairman : "if we did that, we should not be alive. You should see the great piles of it—up to 300, 400, 500 and sometimes 600 pages. We coate into court with an oven mind.

Metropolitan Licensing Authority Criticizes Railway Policy.

Criticism of the railways' attitude towards applications for road-transport licences was expressed by the Metropolitan Licensing. Authority, Mr. Gleeson E. Robinson,during the hearing of an application by Bouts-Tillotson TranSport, Ltd., to replace four existing vehicles (25 tons 12 cwt.), used chiefly for trunk services,. by 10 smaller vehicles (25 tons); to be employed on short-distance Work.

The railway companies alleged that the greater number of vehicles, although of smaller individual carrying capacity, would lead to increased loads.

Mr. Robinson said that the railways' argument could not be decided upon the ground of mathematical accuracy alone. He referred to the recent appeal decision and declared that the railways could not be expected to fight every case on principle arising from the Act.

The modification was allowed.

Rail Objection Withdrawn in Barr Case.

Strenuous opposition at the previous proceedings on the trunk-service issue was withdrawn when the hearing was resumed, at Bradford last Friday, of an application by R. Barr (Leeds), Ltd., for an A. licence for 16 vehicles and seven trailers, in possession or in replacement, with a hiring allowance of two vehicles, The Yorkshire Licensing Authority granted the application, At the previous hearing, railway objectors _alleged that part of the Barr fleet was engaged in trunk-service work, and that the vehicles thus employed should be deleted from the licence, In reply, Mr. W. R. Hargrave submitted that none of the vehicles was engaged on trunk-service work,


comments powered by Disqus