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 
OFFER MADE FOR "REDUNDANT" BUSINESS
Page 99
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
" THE Traffic Commissioners are not entitled to exercise their discretion, except upon known facts." This legal argument by Mr. H. Backhouse, solicitor for the C.M.U.A., was pressed upon Mr. J. W. Nelson, who heard an appeal for the Minister of Transport, at Manchester last week, in reference to a refusal of the North Western Commissioners to transfer the business of Osborne Services (Manchester), Ltd., better known as Osborne Motors, to Mr. T. H. Parker, who, trading as Blue Bird Motors, is the holder of several P.S.V. licences.
The Inspector pointed out that the Commissioners said in their observations, that the number of excursions and tours licences was excessive, and should be reduced as opportunity arose. They, the Commissioners, were entitled to act upon their experience.
Mr. Backhouse replied, that the discretion given to the Commissioners under the Act.was a judicial discretion, and must be exercised only upon known facts. This was the only case, so far as he was aware, in which Commissioners had acted upon an opinion which was not supported by any evidence.
It was one of the original 82 excur sion and tours licences granted in Manchester, and it was confirmed as not redundant when on appeal, Order No. 9 was made, limiting the number of vehicular journeys to Blackpool.
The Commissioners said they did not accept the evidence that the financial difficulties of the holders arose wholly through dealings in private cars; but that was the best possible evidence— that of a chartered accountant—and was not rebutted at all.
It was no business of the Commissioners, what was done with money earned by licence owners. Here the business was shown to be a profitable one. One of the objectors to the transfer, on the ground that the business was redundant, had offered 22,000 for it, and it was now worth £2,500.
It was a well-established principle of law that a man was entitled to sell what he had got, and there were many reasons why a man might want to part with his business. Such a transfer was something that should be done quickly. Stopping the sale to hold an inquiry, which might last months, as the Commissioners had done in this case, was to create a most improper position.
A report on the proceedings is to be submitted to the Minister of Transport. cGl