Dual Role of Solicitor Unethical, Say Objectors
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
1-1 A STRONG protest was put forward by the objectors in a licensing case at Caernarvon, last week, after they had heard the opening statement of the solicitor representing the applicants. The solicitor, Mr. E. L. Amphlett, explained that be was himself managing director of the applicant company, Oak lands Haulage Co., Ltd., Colwyn Bay.
He said there were two other directors —his wife and daughter—and, because his part-time manager was indisposed, he proposed to conduct the case and give evidence.
Mr. G. P. Crowe, for the British Transport Commission was supported by Mr. J. Edward Jones, on behalf of Williams Bros. (Denby), Ltd.; Grey Motors, Ltd., Bethesda; Jones Transport, Ltd., Abergele; and Jenkins Removal Services, Ltd., Colwyn Bay, in submitting that the procedure was completely unethical.
Mr. J. R. Lindsay, North Western Deputy Licensing Authority, ruled that although such matters were unsatisfactory the inquiry should proceed.
Mr. Amphlett said in evidence that additional A-licence vehicles totalling 64 tons unladen were wanted. Fifty per cent. of the company's work was the ear riage of wet fish and mussels from Conway to London and the Midlands. Originally, the local fishing fleet consisted of two small boats, but during the past years it had increased to seven, including larger vessels, and there had been a change from flat fish to whiting.
Concentrated on Fish
During the past three months, the coinpany's two vehicles had been confined 4o the transport of fish and general traffic had been neglected with a consequent loss of goodwill. The peak whiting season would come in the next three months and there was difficulty in hiring because vehicles had to get fish to the Lon-don markets at short notice.
Answering Mr. Edward Jones, Mr. Amphlett said the business was acquired 11 years previously and originally operated in the Llanrwst area carrying livestock. The London office of his legal business had specialized knowledge of traffic court procedure but the Colwyn Bay office was a separate entity.
His Colwyn Bay office was also the registered office of Oaklands Haulage, one of his clerks was part-time secretary, and day to day administration was carried on there. He had a part-time manager located at Conway to deal with the fish traffic.
Questioned further, he said the manager was fully employed by another company who had refused to release him for the inquiry.
After Mr. Amphlett had written down the manager's name and weekly wage, Mr. Edward Jones submitted that it was 'incredible." If other hauliers ran their businesses in such a way they would be open to serious criticism.
Mr. Lindsay commented that the company's main witness should be able to give specific evidence from his personal knowledge of the difficulties, but Mr. Amphlett was unable to do so.
Mr. Amphlett replied that he had 10 wilncsses present, including his foreman driver, who would give ample evidence • of difficulties and need.
After an all-day sitting, Mr. Lindsay adjourned the inquiry to a later date, and Mr. Amphlett applied for a short-term licence to meet the urgent needs for additional fish haulage. Mr. Lindsay refused this application, saying that he had heard no evidence to justify such a grant and the objectors were ready and willing to provide vehicles at reasonable notice.