"The• Biter Bit " : Previous Conduct
Page 5
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
HAULIERS who object to the granting of licences to competitors, on the. 'ground that sufficient transport already exists, must be prepared for the consequences of any concealment of evidence as objectors, when they themselves apply for additional tonnage.
In the matter of the previous conduct of an applicant in the capacity of a carrier of goods, Section 6 (2) (b) of the Road and Rail Traffic Act, 1933, does not refer solely to breaches of licence conditions or to convictions for criminal offences. It relates also to conduct that would be likely to produce serious consequences, such as caw result from mixing attested herds with other cattle in vehicles. .
These points are made clear by the Appal Tribunal in its decision to set aside the grant of a B licence by the Northern . Deputy Licensing Authority to -Mr. J. T. •Nixon, a farmer, of Rowley, Consett,, Co. Durham. Mr. Nixon, who already held an A licence for one vehicle for the carriage of livestock for .other farmers and for local dealers, applied for a B licence for an: additional vehicle:, At the inquiry the application was amended to-restrict use of the lorry to the carriage of livestock within! 50 miles of Consett; farm produce and requisites were excluded. In fact, the Deputy Licensing Authority restricted the operation of the vehicle to the transport of livestock within 12 miles, and attested cattle to and from Hexham.
• No Right of Appeal
Because of the amendment to Mr. Nixon's application, the Deputy Licensing Authority held that Messrs. Salkeld Bros.. who held a B licence permitting the carriage of road and building materials, agricultural pro(1uce and requisites, furniture, • household effects arid open-cast coal within 15 miles of Rowley Station, were not entitled to Object under Section 11 (2) of the 1033 Act.. He heard their solicitor "without any right of appeal." As Messrs. Salkeld Bros. had not been admitted as objectors, they were not represented at the appeal.
The Tribunal holds that, under Section 11 (Z), any person who provides transport facilities is not excluded from objecting merely because they are for the carriage of a different class of goods from those which the applicant desires to handle. A Licensing Authority cannot refuse on that ground to hear an objection which is otherwise admissible.
Mr. Nixon appealed against the reduction of the radius of operation. The Railway Executive responded.
At the original inquiry, Mr. Nixon and his witnesses stated that he had frequently carried in his A-licence vehicle attested herds mixed with other cattle which had not been tuberculin tested. They admitted that this should not have been done, but it was contended that the course had been necessary because Mr. Nixon was not authorized to operate a second vehicle.
The Tribunal points out that Messrs. Salkeld Bros. had previously applied for a licence to enable them to carry livestock and Mr. Nixon had objected to the grant on the ground that there was no need for additional transport, and that he could, with his one A-licence vehicle, meet all needs for cattle transport in the locality. The application for Messrs. Salkeld Bros. was refused.
According to the Tribunal, Mr. Nixon's evidence, when he objected to the application by Messrs. Salkeld Bros., must have been based on the undisclosed fact that he was providing sufficient transport to carry all the cattle to market and for grading by mixing attested cattle with cattle from other non-attested herds.
The Tribunal says that it would be impossible even to atter-Mat to excuse Mr. Nixon's action in carrying cattle in this way, by a contention that he had been compelled to do so because of a shortage of transport. "On the contrary,the decision states, "he had himself contributed to the shortage by opposing the application of a possible competitor."
Referring to the Deputy Licensing Authority's proposal to remove the temptation to mix cattle by allowing Mr. Nixon to run an extra vehicle, the Tribunal says that the licensing of vehicles restricted to the carriage, for hire or reward, of only attested cattle is not desirable. The reasons were originally explained in the Tribunal's decision on the appeal of the Southern Railway and E. M. C. Townshend, and are repeated in the present decision.
. Herds Mixed The Tribunal passes censure on 'Mr. Nixon fel hav;ng mixed herds in contravention of the spirit of the Tuberculosis (Attested Herds) Scheme made under the Ag:icultural Act, 1937. It states that his actions "might not only Cause financial loss to the owners of attested herds, but might also seriously interfere with the attainment of the purposes of the scheme to prevent the spread of tuberculosis and to encourage the establishment of cattle herds officially certified free from tuberculosis."
The Tribunal emphasizes that Section 6 (2) (b) of the 1933 Act has much wider 'implications than the mere checking of the observance of licence conditions and convictions for criminal offences. "It is important," says the Tribunal, "that regard should be paid to previous conduct as a carrier of goods, where the conduct would, as in the present case, be likely to produce such serious consequences as can result from the mixing of cattle from attested herds with other cattle."
In setting aside the grant the Tribunal has remitted the application to the Licensing Authority, so that Messrs. Salkeld Bros. can be heard as objectors, and so that the Licensing Authority can consider •Mr. Nixon's conduct as a carrier N.E. AREA SCHEME: WORKING PARTY BUSY
NEXT Monday the. working party which is examining proposals for the formulation of an area scheme for passenger transport in the north-east of England, will move to Newcastle for local consultations. At present it is engaged on preliminary work in London.
Mr. G. Cardwell. a member-of the Road Transport Executive, is chairman of the working party. The members are Mr. W. Beckett, who is also a member of the R.T.E., and Mr. A. T. Evans. director and general manager of United Automobile Services, Ltd. The British Transport Commission holds most of the shares in that company.
Newcastle City Council is seeking an interview with the Executive regarding the taking over of the municipal transport undertaking under the proposed area scheme. The financial side of the question is likely to be the chief matter to be discussed COMMER "SHOW CONVOY" TOURS CONTINENT
AT the close of the Brussels Show, which opens in the Belgian capital to-morrow, the four vehicles which will represent the range produced by Commer Cars, Ltd.' are being dispatched on a tour of Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg and Switzerland. They will then be shown at the Geneva Exhibition from March 17-27, afterwards visiting Berne, Basle and Zurich before returning to Geneva en route for Luton.
This Commer convoy comprises an 8-cwt. Supervan, a 4-5-ton Superpoise oiler with drop-sided body, a 7-ton drop-sided lorry with underfloor engine, and an Avenger 34-seater coach with Harrington bodywork.
[Details of the British exhibits at the Brussels Shaw are given on pages 673-677 of this issue.] DELAY IN S.M.T. DEAL
EDINBURGH reports indicate that the proposed deal between the Scottish Motor Traction Co., Ltd., and the British Transport Commission may he delayed because of the high price which the directors of the company are believed to be demanding.