AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Document Expert at Licensing Case

12th May 1939, Page 27
12th May 1939
Page 27
Page 27, 12th May 1939 — Document Expert at Licensing Case
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?

SrrTING •Harrogate, last week, Major F. S. Eastwood, Yorkshire Licensing Authority, partly heard three applications for the renewal of A licences on behalf of Mr. Horace Shuttleworth, Idle, Bradford: Mr. Joseph Cooling, White Lea Side, Heckmondwike: and Mrs. Helena Hattetsley, Jack Lane, Leeds. Mr. Shottleworth and Mr. Cooling were described as the London and Glasgow managers, respectively, of Archbold and Co., Ltd., transport Contractor, Leeds. and all three applicants stated that they had entered into agreements with the company, whereby the company took over the management of their haulage-contracting businesses. In answer to Mr. E. P. Merritt, who opposed the applications on behalf of the London and North-Eastern and London. Midland and Scottish Railway Companies, Mr. Shuttleworth agreed that; in April, 1938, he entered into an agreement with a company named Affiliated Transport, Ltd., but denied that that company was formed at the instance of Mr. J. F. Archbold and Archbold arid Co., Ltd. He admitted that in April, 1928, and again in November and December, Affiliated Transport, Ltd., applied to the Licensing Authority at Leeds for a licence, among others, for a vehicle which he was licensed to use, and that eventually all the applications were withdraw n .

Mr. Merritt: "And now we find you

here asking for the renewal of a licence and alleging that you have got a business still and ought-tO have the licence renewed."

Mr. Shuttleworth: "Yes.'

"I suggest you are paid a salary as the London manager for Archbold and Co., Ltd. Is it fixed or does it vary?" —"No, it is fixed." " I suggest you are just a paid servant of Archbold and Co., Ltd., you are nothing else, and this management agreement is a colourable sham."

Mrs. Hattersley said she had been perfectly satisfied with her arrangement with Archbold and Co., Ltd., otherwise she would not have carried on with it. Mr. W. R. Hal.grave, Leeds, for the applicants, mentioned that Mrs. Hattersley had submitted her agreement to his firm before she had gone through with it.

It was alleged, for the objectors, that certain documents, including management agreements, had been executed contemporaneously, for the purpose of placing them before the Licensing Authority, and on the second day of the hearing Colonel W. W. Mansfield, document investigator, gave evidence. Stating that certain documents had been submitted to laboratory 'tests, he said that the dates on certain agreements were not borne out by the ageing of the ink.

Before the court was adjourned, Mr. .F. Archbold agreed to submit certain books to the Authority.


comments powered by Disqus