Licensing Held to Upset Constitution
Page 40
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Tiljudicial committee of the Privy Council have granted a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court of Australia by Hughes and Vale Pty., Ltd. The company are hauliers of general goods between Sydney and Brisbane.
Questions had been raised about the constitutional validity of the State Transport (Co-ordination) Act, 1931-52, of New South Wales, which empowered State licensing authorities to grant licences for the carriage of goods between one State and another.
The company claimed that the licensing system contravened the constitutional freedom of inter-State trade conferred by the Australian Constitution Act.
The respondent, the State of New South Wales, contended that it should have power to regulate the use of its roads. It was not now proper to have these questions reopened when they had come to be regarded as a settled feature of constitutional law.
OXFORD TRAFFIC PROPOSAL OPPOSED BY N.R.T.F.
THE National Road Transport Federation are opposing the Oxford Corporation Bill, which contains a clause to extend "the powers of the Corporation to make Orders under Section 21 of the Town Police Clauses Act, 1847, so as to regulate or prohibit the stoppage of all vehicles or of vehicles of any class or description in any street in the city, either at all hours or at any particular hours."
Such a clause, says the Traders' Road Transport Association, would enable the corporation to make traffic regulations without confirmation by the Ministry of Transport, as is required at present It is held that existing law gives municipalities sufficient powers, but provides essential safeguards. If the clause sought by Oxford Corporation were passed, there would be no such safeguards.
ENOUGH ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS
THE Minister of Transport said, on Monday, that the number of enforcement officers on the staffs of the Licensing Authorities for Goods Vehicles—about 120—was adequate. He denied that there had been a great increase in evasion of the law.
He also said that it was untrue that many of those whom he had approached to serve on the committee of inquiry into London Transport had refused to do so.
He had not yet made appointments to the vacancies that would arise in
• August and September on the British Transport Commission and the Executives. He was in constant touch with the chairman of the Commission on the matter and hoped soon to make an announcement.