A RAILWAY COMPANY SECURES AN INJUNCTION.
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE dispute between the London and North Eastern Railway Company and the Stockton Corporation, with reference to the running of buses by the municipality between Stockton and West Hartlepool—reported in last week's issue of The Commercial Motor —took a further turn on Monday of last week, when the railway authority made a successful appeal to the Court of Appeal and obtained a reversal of the decision of the lower Court. The judge, it will be recalled, declined to grant the injunction applied for by the railway company -on the ground that it would lead to public inconvenience.
In the Court of Appeal, Mr. Tyldesley Jones, K.C., for the railway company, explained that although the corporation secured sanction from the Ministry of Transport in 1920 to run buses over the portion of the route outside the Stockton borough boundaries, namely, that portion from Port Clarence to West Hartlepool, that consent was only for seven years. When the period expired and an application was made for a renewal of the consent the Ministry declined to grant an extension of the period.
Mr. Luxmore, lc-C., who appeared for the Stockton Corporation, argued that
the municipality had unconditional powers from the local and road authorities to run buses on the route. In addition, he submitted, the sanction of the Ministry of Transport, once secured, was sufficient.
In the opinion of the Master of the Bolls, the corporation had not conformed with Section436 of the Act of 1919, by operating buses along the route without the consent of the Ministry. He was not able to accept the submission that the consent of the Ministry, once obtained, was a consent for an time, and he thought the appeal should be allowed and the injunction granted.