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 
Normal User Changed: "Renewal" Appeal Lost
Page 62
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DECAUSE "the appellant company deliberately over a period of two years abandoned any attempt to observe .the declaration on the faith of which they had obtained their licence," the Transport Tribunal have dismissed an appeal by T. Hesketh, Ltd., against the North Western Licensing Authority's refusal to renew an A licence. As The Commercial Motor reported on January 31, decision was reserved. A Awritten judgment was issued this week.
The principles at stake were similar to those in the Knight case (The Commercial Motor, February 2.8),
The A licence originally granted in June, 1948, to a Mr. T. Hesketh, of Widnes, was for "all classes of goods, Liverpool, London, Widnes and as required."
In December, 1948, the licence was transferred to T. Hesketh, Ltd., who bought the business. They were granted a new licznce in June, 1951, for "all Imperial Chemical Industries, Ltd., goods as required."
In 1954, the shares in the company were acquired by a Mr. J. A. Williams and his son, Mr. A. R. Williams, who were hauliers. After that time, the vehicle specified in the A licence was moved from Widnes to Liverpool and was employed on work other than for I.C.I. The renewal application last September, which was refused, sought to restores thern normal user of June, 1948.
The written judgment says that .Mr. A. R. Williams was well 'aware that the vehicle could be properly used only for It is emphasized that every departure from previous normal-user declarallon should not be regarded as calling for the refusal of a subsequent application. The exercise of the discretion to do so depends on the facts.
NO NEW " C" RESTRICTIONS TO HELP RAILWAYS rURTHER restrictions on the use of C-licence vehicles to bolster up railway freight traffic were rejected last Friday by Mr. Harold Watk inson, Minister of Transport, in an address to the Institution of Locomotive Engineers. Nevertheless, before increasing C-licence fleets, industrial traffic managers should, he said, make sure that they were doing so in their own long-term interests. . They should be certain that public hauliers, whcther road or rail, could not give the required service more economically.
Mr. Watkinson did not doubt that the. railways, when they had developed their freight facilities under the modernization programme, would attract a large amount of traffic now passing in C-licence vehicles. At present, however, freight train traffic was declining at a disturbing rate. An all-out drive to improve the service and to sell it was required.
[Rail freight receipts in the first eight weeks of this year totalled £54.5m., compared with £59.3m. in the corresponding period of 1957.]