AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Challenge to B.M.M.O. s Right to Appeal Fails

23rd October 1953
Page 43
Page 43, 23rd October 1953 — Challenge to B.M.M.O. s Right to Appeal Fails
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?

Keywords : Hinckley, Appeal

'HE right of Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co., Ltd., to peal . against the East Midland :ensing Authority's refusal to grant !in permission to run additional :ursions and tours from Hinckley' s. challenged by Mr. D. E. Skelding, retary of the Road Passenger and knsport Association, when Sir Robert lerton, a Ministry of Transport pector, opened an inquiry into the npany's appeal against the decision I week. The company also appealed tinst the grant to Wainfleet Motor vices, Ltd., Hinckley and Nuneaton, run additional excursions and tours m Hinckley.

dr. Skelding, representing Wainfleet ?tor Services, Ltd., submitted that the pector had no right to hear the mai because the B.M.M.O. applicai was for a variation of the condiis of a road service licence and there -e no regulations to enable an applit to appeal if such an application -e refused.

Additional Destinations 4r. H. R. Herbert, for the appelts, replied that although his clients I asked for a variation of their nee and not its conditions, the appliion was, in substance, one for a nce for additional destinations, and such a case there was a statutory It of appeal.

ir Robert suggested that the hearing allowed to continue into the iministrative aspect" of the appeal lout prejudice to the legal point ed by Mr. Skelding, which would put forward to the Minister's legal isers. Both parties agreed to this. he original 10 places sought by I.M.O. for running vehicles to race itings were Cheltenham, Chepstow, ,ster, Epsom, Manchester, Southt, Stow-on-the-VVold, Billing Aquame, Lickey Hills and Sutton Park. company also sought to operate to

a further 16 destinations which were asked for by the respondents.

The inspector said that the fundamental essence of the case was that of the existing operator against a newcomer. Subject to a study of the actual evidence, he did not think that there was sufficient justification for him to recommend the Minister to set aside the Authority's decision,

Tags

Organisations: Ministry of Transport
Locations: Manchester, Birmingham

comments powered by Disqus