AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Wyatt appeal allowed in part

26th July 1974, Page 22
26th July 1974
Page 22
Page 22, 26th July 1974 — Wyatt appeal allowed in part
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?

AN APPEAL by J. Wyatt Jnr (Haulage) Ltd to the Transport Tribunal against a decision of the Eastern LA was allowed to the extent That a suspension of 20 vehicles and 15 trailers for one year was reduced to a suspension of five vehicles for six months.

In a written decision the Transport Tribunal said that the Eastern LA was under the impression that the appellants had given an undertaking to reduce the risk of overloading by refraining from using vehicles with draw-bar trailers. Counsel for the appellants, Mr Michael Burrell, argued that no such undertaking was given. This argument was supported by an affidavit sworn by Mr John Wyatt (the principal director and shareholder) which stated that he had not authorized his son Mr Christopher Wyatt, who appeared at the 1971 inquiry, to give such a undertaking. The Tribunal decided that no unequivocal undertaking had been given, and further that if a Licensing Authority intended to rely on such an undertaking that its terms should be "most positively established".

The Transport Tribunal recognized mitigating circumstances and accepted that the appellant had taken steps to obviate the risk of overloading in the future.


comments powered by Disqus