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
141
142
143
144 
A-licence Grant for 34 Vehicles
Page 45
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
riA SPECIMEN form of contract, sent by the North Western Licensing Authority's office to a haulier operating vehicles under contract to Chloride Batteries Ltd., was given as the reason why W. Nuttall and Sons Ltd., of Clifton, Manchester, was seeking a new A licence for a total of 37 vehicles, 19 of which were operating under Contract A licence. and eight under A licence.
For the applicant, Mr. I. Backhouse said that Nuttall wished to carry batteries, accumulators and their parts and detergents all over England." The company also wanted to carry builders' plant and materials as required for Lancashire contractors.
When the contract licence was due to be renewed, Mr. Backhouse explained, a specimen form of contract was sent to the company by the Authority's office. This differed from the previous form in two respects—with regard to the requirements of the minimum annual tonnage and minimum payments—and stated that a certificate was required to be completed by the customer company that goods carried would not include goods for or on behalf of any wholly subsidiary or associated company.
The specimen was forwarded to Chloride—the contract customer—and it was this that had given rise to the company's reluctance to enter into new contract arrangements for haulage.
Giving evidence, Mr. T. H. Dorman, transport manager of Nuttall, said that Chloride wanted Nuttall to carry goods for Rozalex Ltd. and Pritchard and Gold Ltd., who were subsidiary and associated companies. Chloride also wanted to effect some economy with regard to rates.
Cross-examined by Mr. G. H. P. Beames, for British Railways, Mr. Dorman admitted that throughout the years, from 1957, the contract vehicles had carried goods, from time to time, for the associated companies.
Mr. Beames: "By coming forward and asking for this normal user, you are merely putting on a correct basis something which has been done illegally for some time. This desire for a licence has been a desire to put yourself right?" Mr. Dorman replied that this was so.
Giving his decision, the North Western deputy Licensing Authority, Mr. A. H. Joiliffe, said that the Jones appeal decision was the one he had in mind in considering the matter, which had a number of points in common with the application. He felt he could grant the application with certain amendments. The eight A vehicles would be allowed to carry the builders' contractors materials on the existing normal user, but three vehicles would be deducted from the 37, applied for.