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 
Tribunal Rejects Railway Appeal
Page 48
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IT was alleged before the Transport I Tribunal in London on Tuesday that the British Railways Board was making an appeal on "a petty point of principle ". Mr. M. H. Jackson-Lipkin, counsel for a Wolverhampton haulage firm, claimed that the Transport Holding Company (British Road Services) had withdrawn from the ease because since its judicial separation from British Railways on January I last, it had abandoned "this nonsense of coming here over and over again ".
The Tribunal rejected an appeal by B.R. against the grant of an A licence by the West Midland deputy Licensing Authority to A. G. Bird (Transport) Ltd. for nine vehicles on the surrender of four on Contract A licence and five on B licence. Eight of the vehicles carry for Midland Tar Distillers Ltd. and associated companies and had special features to make them suitable for this traffic.
The Tribunal acting president, Miss M. H. Kidd, said that the Authority was right in granting an A licence, but the Tribunal thought he should have had more information before him as to the occupation and use of the responding company's main fleet.
" In these circumstances the appeal is refused subject to the Licensing Authority giving further consideration to the quantum of vehicles to be carried," Miss Kidd added. She said the company would be allowed to continue with its present number of vehicles until the Licensing Authority had made his decision.
Earlier, Mr. Jackson-Lipkin told the Tribunal that arguments on technicalities were in grave danger of making the Tribunal quite unsuited to the needs of a national industry which needed flexibility, and which should not be dealt with on technicalities.
For British Railways, Mr. A. J. F. Wrottesley recalled cases earlier this year, in which the railways had been successful appellants, and said it was not frivolous
for the railways to appeal. He submitted that the granting of a B-licence, with suitable conditions, could easily overcome the difficulties of the customer and the haulier.
Mr. Jackson-Lipkin said that Bird Transport, supported by its principal customer, Midland Tar Distillers, had told the Licensing Authority the company was in difficulties, and apprehending possible illegalities.
They were trying to do the same work on various types of licence, and this was not in the customer's or the company's interest.