HIGH COURT STRESSES THAT USER APPLIES TO OUTWARD TRAFFIC
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THREE judges in the Court of Appeal I last week ruled that the Transport Tribunal was right in refusing to grant A licences for four artics to Mr: Derek R. Munson. of Nayland. Colchester.
.[he Court—Lord Denning (Master of die Rolls), Lord Justice Danckwerts and Lord Justice Winn—dismissed with costs Munson's appeal from the Tribunal, which upheld a decision of the Eastern deputy Licensing Authority in March last year.
Giving judgment, Lord Denning said that Munson operated nine vehicles under A licences, with the normal user declared as: "General haulage, mainly East Anglia and London." He applied or an additional four licences, with the normal riser declared as: " Imported goods, mainly timber, London, Eastern Counties and Midlands." ' Among the goods which Munson caried under his existing licences was imber imported through the Felixstowe Docks, and the reason put forward for requiring further licences was that there was a need for more vehicles to handle this traffic.
The Tribunal expressed doubts as to whether the evidence of need would he sufficient to justify granting any more icences to Munson. But it found that his existing fleet could, if solely engaged in the work for which he was licensed, cope with more timber imported through Felixstowe Docks.
Lord Denning said there was nothing wrong in the way the Tribunal had mproachcd the matter. It could rightly Find that the carriage by Munson's vehicles of bricks from the Bedford area to Colchester was not within the statement of intention which was in his original application — certainly when vehicles were sent empty to Bedford to take on bricks and carry them back.
The judge continued: "It is well settled that an outward journey counts towards a normal user, and after the goods have been delivered the return. journey is ' free A person who has a licence can fill up his empty lorry for his return journey without being guilty of any breach.
• " But it seems to me the Tribunal could well consider in this case. that Munson had gone considerably beyond his original statement on User in embarking on his brick trade to Bedfordshire.
If he had limited himself to his original intention, he could have fulfilled these extra timber requirements without having ally additional lorries at all. That is, in effect. what the Tribunal said."
Contention Rejected
Lord Denning said that if a haulier went outside his declared intention and did not fulfil that intention, disciplinary action could he taken to revoke, suspend or curtail his licence. So, too, could his previous conduct he taken into account when he applied for the renewal of a licence or for licences for extra vehicles.
The Court rejected a contention on behalf of Munson that the Tribunal had
misdirected in law as to the nature and quality of an A licence, Lord Denning considered that one of the most important necessities was for the licensinu Authority to know the class of goods to be carried.