AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

A FTER hearing on Tuesday that a haulage company had been

13th December 1957
Page 45
Page 45, 13th December 1957 — A FTER hearing on Tuesday that a haulage company had been
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?

refused renewal of three A licences as a penalty for alleged irregularities, Mr. Hubert Hull, president of the Transport Tribunal, asked: " Are they for all time to be precluded from asking for A licences?"

He wondered what would be the position of C. Knight and Sons, Hanley. Stoke on Trent, if their appeal were rejected. Mr. G. P. Crowe, for the British Transport Commission, replied that they would lose some of the advantages they had previously gained.

Knight's were appealing against the West Midland Deputy Licensing Authority's refusal to renew A licences for two vehicles based at Hanley, and an articulated outfit at Cheadle. Mr. F. Stockdale, for Knight's, said the main question was whether it was right for the application to be rejected as a penalty for changing their activities over the years and not regularizing the position by way of variations of their licences.

He explained that before the passing of the 1947 Act there were three companies, two of them primarily concerned with furniture transport and removals, and the third with long-distance haulage. The long-distance work was taken over by the B.T.C., and after several changes, two companies were formed. It was expected that one of them would enter long-distance haulage again sometime.

Their furniture work was canalized on the B-licence fleet. Later, all they did was to enter long-distance haulage, which Parliament intended any A-licence holder should be entitled to do.

Mr. Crowe submitted that after the removal of the 25-mile limit, the three vehicles were transferred to the resurrected company, which had been in operation before nationalization. He asked whether A-licence holders were entitled to switch their licences to ally type of goods during the five-year period.

Replying to Mr. Hull, he agreed that he WO* asking for the company to be penalized, and that the penalty should be suspension. Decision was reserved.


comments powered by Disqus