TRIBUNAL REMITS TWO CASES TO YORKS DEPUTY L.A.
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IN a reserved written judgment, the I Transport Tribunal has remitted back to the Yorkshire deputy Licensing Authority the cases of A One Transport (Leeds) Ltd. and C.N.C..Transport Ltd., so that he may take into consideration the interests of other hauliers involved.
The two companies were .appealing against the refusal of the deputy L.A. to grant them each 14 vehicles on A licence replacing vehicles operated under Contract A arrangements for Concrete (Northern) Ltd., of Leeds.
After reviewing the evidence and noting the fact that the deputy L.A. had acceded to a submission made on behalf of the objectors that no prima facie case had been made out, the Tribunal said that the deputy L.A. was very properly endeavouring to exercise his discretion with regard to the interestsof the public generally, as required by Section 174 of the 1960 Road Traffic Act. However, the Tribunal continued, "he did not extend
his regard sufficiently widely. He appears to have drawn a distinction between the public in general on the one hand, and Concrete (Northern) on the other ". Concrete (Northern), the Tribunal added, were persons requiring facilities for transport.
Quoting Lord Justice Devlin in the Arnold Transport (Rochester) appeal, the Tribunal concluded that in the circumstances a Licensing Authority was not entitled to reject an application out of hand. He should go on and consider the other factors in the. case and, in particular, the interests of other hauliers. Maybe that when the interests of other hauliers in the case had been considered they would be of sufficient weight to justify the refusal of the applications. It was, however, for the other hauliers concerned to show that their interests should. in the circumstances of the case, prevail over those of Concrete (Northern) Ltd. and the appellants.