Experimental-vehicles Grant Was Wrong
Page 15
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE Transport Tribunal, in a written judgment issued last Friday, has allowed an appeal by A. R. Pass and others against a grant made by the West Midland Deputy Licensing Authority to Refrigerated Meat Traders Ltd., specifying three refrigerated vehicles with remove able containers on an A licence.
Much of the hearing before the deputy Authority, which lasted a total of five days, was occupied in canvassing the respective merits of insulated and refrigerated transport for meat and poultry. "The evidence did not estab-lish that there was an absolute superiority of refrigerated over insulated vehicles ", the judgment said. The evidence went no further than to indicate that •in some circumstances it would be worth paying the extra cost of employing refrigerated vehicles.
The deputy Authority, the judgment continued, seemed to havelaken the view that refrigerated vehicles were technically superior to insulated vehicles, for he held that he would be justified in the public interest in licensing the vehicles concerned as an experiment, adding however that. he felt, even following the long-established principle of showing need for a grant, that he would be justified on the evidence in making the grant.
The deputy erred inselegating the question of need to second, place. "We do not regard it as one of-the functions of licensing authorities or of this Tribunal to grant hauliers' licences for experimental purposes".
The evidence did not warrant the grant of a licence. applying "the conventional tests of need", and, the Tribunal ruled, the grant should be vacated and the appeal allowed.