1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176 
BR failed to make out case in Freightliner bid appellants
Page 56
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
BRMSH RAILWAYS failed to make out a prima facie case at an inquiry in November 1966 in the Scottish Southern area when they applied for 16 maximum-capacity artic vehicles. But the objectors made out a statutory objection. So submitted Mr. J. A. Murray, for the eight
AN ORDER for a total of 40 AEC Marshall 22-ton-gross six-wheeled tipping lorries, equipped with a new type of lightweight all-welded aluminium tipping body, has been received by T. J. Richardson and Sons Ltd. of Oldbury, Staffs., from Tarmac Roadstone Ltd.
The layout was evolved by the bodybuilders, Truck Engineering Ltd., in close collaboration
applicants, to the Transport Tribunal in Edinburgh last week.
Mr. Murray said that BR had no difficulty in meeting their requirements when the application was made in July 1966. From September until the hearing in November they had also been able to meet customer demand with their own vehicles and others hired from the THC.
Features include Edbro front-of-body singleram tipping gear. The order is valued at £180,000 and is part of a total order for AEC plated vehicles since the introduction of the new regulations worth £700,000.
Mr. E. Hopwood, of British Railways, had told the LA, Mr. A. Birnie, that the application was to eliminate hiring, in accordance with BR policy. Mr. Aitken, BR Glasgow region cartage and terminals manager, had admitted that he was having no difficulty in obtaining suitable vehicles and had agreed that Glasgow area hauliers had offered him vehicles which he had not needed.
"We agree that there has been an element of hiring," added Mr. Murray, "but proof of hiring is not of itself sufficient evidence to justify a grant." He referred to the Tribunal's judgment in the Siddle C. Cooke case when it had taken a similar view.
Commenting on BR documentation, Mr. Murray said that if the requirement indication was accurate BR needed 25 additional vehicles and not 16.
"But," he said, "in the week before the public inquiry they carried all their containers in their 33 maximum-capacity vehicles."
He submitted that if any case had been made out it was for no more than six vehicles. Even this grant would eliminate hiring completely.
British Rail documentation showed that between July and November there had been a loss of traffic by road hauliers of 800 ions a week, according to the appellants' advocate. This abstraction of long-haul traffic had therefore made vehicles available for collection and delivery. That the objectors had these facilities available had not been contested, and this was accepted by the LA in his written decision.
The objectors had offered more than 16 vehicles at the inquiry and British Railways had been able to meet traffic demand without accepting the offer. "The need was met and no difficulty exists," said Mr. Murray.
The Tribunal's decision is to be given in writing.