Trouble was of appellants' own making
Page 40
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• When W. S. and A. J. Kedvvard appealed to the Transport Tribunal on Tuesday, it was not to have the decision of a Licensing Authority reversed, but to have their applications remitted to the South Wales LA, who had previously refused to grant the continuation of an A,licence authorizing two vehicles and a B licence authorizing five vehicles.
As was customary, said Mr. P. Kenworthy Brown, for the appellants, the LA arranged for the inspection of the vehicles. These proved to be me such a state of bad maintenance, however, that it was necessary to call the appellants to public inquiry.
At that inquiry, he said, one • of the appellants told the LA that all the vehicles had been used solely on site work for the past year, and were likely to be kept on that work during the following nine months. The accounts were produced and showed that this was not the case, but Mr. Kedwarel insisted that it was the accounts and not his evidence which were at fault.
The LA would not grant a renewal of the licences as no licences would have been needed if the vehicles were to have been used on site work. By refusing the grant, he also made sure that potentially dangerous vehicles would not be allowed on the road.
Mr. Kenworthy-Brown told the Tribunal that, in fact, Mr. Kedward had given false evidence at the public inquiry, and the effect of the LA's decision was virtually to put the appellants out of business. This, he considered, was a penalty much greater than that which the LA would have imposed had he known the true facts of the ease.
Giving the decision of the Tribunal, Mr. G. D. Squibb QC, president, said that the trouble which had been caused had been entirely of the appellants' making. He could see no reason why they should be given two bites at the cherry, and advised them to make a fresh application.