AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tribunal Dismisses Revived' Alexander Appeal

23rd October 1964
Page 34
Page 34, 23rd October 1964 — Tribunal Dismisses Revived' Alexander Appeal
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?

IN February, 1963, the Scottish Licensing

Authority refused an application by Charles Alexander and Partners for an A licence for 25 vehicles, mainly to carry goods for North British Rubber Co., of Edinburgh, previously carried by C-hiring vehicles from Clark and Co. and other operators. On appeal, the Tribunal admitted a prima fade case and referred back to `the L.A. to allow examination of the available facilities and their suitability. Once again, however, he refused to make a grant, contending that available facilities were, in fact, adequate and suitable. The case was reheard by the Tribunal in Edinburgh on Tuesday and Wednesday when the second appeal was also dismissed.

The Tribunal stated that the appellants made application for a new A licence with an enlarged normal user and also asked for 14 additional vehicles to carry the North British traffic, with surrender of existing licences. One of these existing licences had expired and had been replaced by a new licence. The technical point was made that this licence could not be surrendered, having expired. Alexander and Partners thereupon offered to surrender the licences now held and it was indicated that the Tribunal would accept that.

Having considered the evidence, the Tribunal decided that the respondents had. succeeded in discharging the onus on them of showing that facilities would c.:e in excess of requirement if the application was granted.