No Guarantee of Licences
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Court of Appeal on Monday disised an appeal by Mr. G. H. G. , haulage contractor of Ruskin -louse, Denmark Hill, London, ho claimed that he was entitled ages against ballast merchants for of contract in connection with the ! haulage licences for work on the by-pass last year.
..tourt upheld a judgment of Judge ; at Slough County Court on May sour of T. W. Bates (Aggregates), Bedfont Road, Stanwell.
Garbett alleged that under a conrith the company in July, 1960, as an express condition that he be enabled to operate three ; under a contract A licence for ilage of hoggin from a pit at Iver, to the by-passe ctobere 1960, he was informed by ensing Authority that the earlier f contract A licences to him was Garbett contended that he would .een able to earn more money .:ontract A licence than under a ary B licence, which the Licensing ity was prepared to allow him. ig judgment the Master of the Lord Evershed) said that if there n oral term under the contract ng contract A licences it was diffidiscover exactly what it was.
Mr. Bates warranted that contract AR PARKING SURVEY
3DUCING a national car parking ef, carried out by the British Road lion, Lord Derwent, the B.R.F. an, said in London on Tuesday: rue that a number of local authortrying to overcome the problem. nerally, one is confronted with an ion that there is a definite lack of /." He called for a stronger eh to the growing problem of Longo. parking on public roads.
A licences would be issued by the Authority, it might be said that there had been a breach, but the .evidence fell far short of proving anything in the nature of warranty.
His lordship was by no means satisfied that even if there had been such a term Mr. Garbett could have proved damage.
Lord Justice Donovan said that the case stood or fell according to whether or not the contract contained an implied condition. That was a question of fact and the trial judge was entitled to accept the evidence of Mr. Bates that there was no such condition. Lard Justice Danckwerts agreed that the appeal should be dismissed with costs.
TEST CASE UNDECIDED
ATEST case to decide whether or not an Austin Ornnicoach, fitted with a roof rack upon which flowers are carried for hire or reward, is a goods vehicle within the wording of the 1960 Road Traffic Act was adjourned sine die at Bow Street (London) magistrates court on Tuesday because of the nonappearance of a prosecution witness. The defendants, Flower Freight Co.. Ltd., of London (who hold no carriers licences at all), had requested the Metropolitan Licensing Authority to prosecute them in order that the question can be decided, if necessary, before the Divisional Court.