LOWLOADER AP PEAL SUCCEEDS
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN Edinburgh operator. Sandy Dyer (Contractors) Ltd. succeeded in an appeal to the Tribunal in Edinburgh on Wednesday against the Scottish LA's refusal of a B licence for a low-loader based in Edinburgh with a radius of 50 miles.
The Tribunal was told that the unit had been published as a trailer and that the low-loader aspect arose only during the hearing, as did a second base at Johnstone. which was rejected as being more than 50 miles from Edinburgh.
In the Tribunal decision it was indicated that they could not support the application in the wide terms requested; but there was some reason in the case presented by Mr. Dyer regarding the advantages to other contractors if the firm's low-loader were used to assist on occasions from sites where they had their low-loader working. They thought the proper course was to allow the appeal with a condition: " contractors' plant and equipment within 50 miles of base as return loads from sites to which the appellants have delivered their own plant ". For the respondents, Mr. J. B. S. Buchanan claimed, with respect. that this decision was wrong; the vehicle had never been published as a low-loader; 50 miles would take it into the Northern traffic area of Scotland where low-loader operators were not aware that the original application involved such a vehicle. He suggested republication.
The Tribunal decided that its decision must stand.
NO DECISION YET THE Tribunal this week reserved judgment in an appeal by Bell and Co. (Transport) Ltd.. against a decision of the Scottish Licensing Authority which granted replacement of rigids by articulated vehicles but refused two additional articulated outfits. The refusal was based on ability to do additional work and weakness of customer evidence. Mr. G. Shiach outlined the case as presented originally and claimed that an increase of turnover of 05,000 between 1961 and 1964 justified the appeal.
Mr. Dan McKay, for the responding hauliers, contended that no detailed breakdown of the increase had been given. There was no evidence at all that the 05,000 arose from transport operations.