AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Railways and Coach Firm Lose Appeals

25th April 1952, Page 67
25th April 1952
Page 67
Page 67, 25th April 1952 — Railways and Coach Firm Lose Appeals
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?

THE Minister of Transport has dismissed two appeals relating to express-service licences. In the first, the Railway Executive appealed against the decision of the West Midland Licensing Authority granting Mr. ,E. Newton, of Perry Barr, a variation of a licence for an express service from Birmingham to Margate. The variation authorized three additional picking-up points near Margate and one at Snow Hill, Birmingham.

The R.E. case rested on the fact that the licence had originally been refused by the Licensing Authority and granted • on appeal. It was not in the public interest, the railways submitted, to add extensive grants to relatively new licences. The operator declared that the picking-up points had been shown to be necessary, especially at Snow Hill, for passengers disembarking there could continue homeward journeys on the corporation all-night buses. Costs were awarded against the Railway Executive.

In his decision on the appeal of Messrs. Gardiner Bros., Low Spennymoor, Co. Durham, against the refusal of the Northern Licensing Authority to grant a licence for an epsress service between Sacriston and London, the Minister of Transport stated that direct services of this type were not necessary or desirable. In his observations, the Ministry inspector declared that small towns such as those in which the appellant proposed to set down passengers, were best served by feeder routes. The terminal is five miles from Durham.

The appellant was supported by the urban district councils of Stanley, Tow Law and Consett, the case being that the Licensing Authority had decided that the service was needed, but should be operated by United Automobile %Services, Ltd. U.A.S. evidence showed that the service was not needed. Out of 17 vehicles authorized for the trunk road route, a maximum of four had been used.


comments powered by Disqus