AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Objectors' Appeals Succeed

1st February 1935
Page 31
Page 31, 1st February 1935 — Objectors' Appeals Succeed
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

ADECISION by the Yorkshire Licensing Authority was set aside by the Appeal Tribunal, sitting at York, last week. The Tribunal allowed appeals by the London and North Eastern Railway Co. and W. P. Newhams, Ltd., a Scarborough haulage concern, against the granting of a Class A licence to Mr. J. Hurd, of Scarborough, in respect of a 3-ton vehicle to be acquired for the purpose of carrying general goods from Scarborough to Leeds and where required. The Tribunal did not make any order as to costs.

When the hearing of the appeal was opened on January 23, Mr. B. de H. Pereira (for the L.N,E.R.) submitted that the evidence did not justify the granting of the licence. He added that Mr. Hurd had had no connection with the haulage industry, and that the application for the licence was really on behalf of his son, an undischarged bankrupt, who was to be the driver of the vehicle. Mr. W. R. Hargrave (for W. P. Newhams, Ltd.) said that Mr. Hurd had made no attempt to show that the work was not already being done satisfactorily by other operators.

In announcing the decision, the chairman, Mr. Rowand Harker, N.C., said that, whilst the Tribunal was not impressed by the railway company's case. it was much influenced by the arguments on behalf of Newhams. It was not for him (the chairman) to investigate the suggestion of rate-cntting, but the fact remained that the Newhams concern had lost the work which it was doing for three firms, between the months of June and November last.


comments powered by Disqus