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
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172 
Tipper Switch Decision Reversed
Page 48
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A DECISION of the Scottish Deputy 11 Licensing Authority refusing an application by A. Slater's Haulage (Scotland), Ltd., Perth, to switch two tippers from contract to A licence, was reversed by the Transport Tribunal in Edinburgh last week.
Mr. A. P. Brawn, for the appellants, said that the normal user required was fertilizers and plant for Fisons, Ltd., from Perth, Leith and Bo'ness to all parts of Scotland with occasional runs to the North of England and Immingham.
The contract to be surrendered was with Fisons, Ltd., who desired to end the contract. Fisons had stated that they proposed to restrict their traffic to the appellants to between 65 and 75 per cent. of that carried for them under the contract. The vehicles, added Mr. Brown, had been specially constructed for Fisons' work.
The Authority had decided that, with the cut in work to be done for Fisons, the application should be refused. In
the meantime, to keep the case open, Fisons and the appellants had continued their contract to July, 1962.
Mr. Brown submitted that the Authority had been misdirected in law. He probably had in mind the judgments in the Arnold and Merchandise cases— judgments which were not binding in Scotland.
The Licensing Authority had told the applicants that they should apply for a B licence. This they had done and that application had been granted. On behalf of the appellants he was prepared to give an undertaking that if the appeal were successful the B licence grant would not be taken up.
Mr. A. B. Wilkinson, for the respondents, the B.T.C., and six other operators, said that the trouble with granting an open licence would be that there would he abstraction of traffic from other hauliers.
Remarked Sir Hubert: "But surely the onus is on the objectors to prove that the work proposed to be done was being done by the objectors, or could be done by them."
Allowing the appeal, Sir Hubert said: "The Deputy Licensing Authority should have granted this. There was some slip in his logic. The Tribunal did not see why the Authority should have caused an "unnecessary inquiry" by suggesting an application for a B licence.