AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

MERTHyR BUS PROPRIETORS' VICTORY.

2nd December 1924
Page 8
Page 8, 2nd December 1924 — MERTHyR BUS PROPRIETORS' VICTORY.
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

The decision of the Merthyr. Tydfil bus proprietors (referred to in our issue for November 18th) to apply for a High Court injunction restraining the Merthyr Tydfil Borough Council from the alleged abuse of its statutory powers of bus running will not immediately be proceeded with, the Council having given an undertaking not to run buses outside the area, and not, by contract or otherwise, to make use of its buses as coaches to cater for private parties wishing to proceed to places outside the borough.

Furthermore, the Council has instructed the cancellation of any existing contracts under these heads, thus remov• ing the cause of grievance amongst the

B24 various private proprietors concerned. This victory for private enterprise is due to the fact that the bus owners of the area banded together to contest the alleged " abuse of powers," and to the. intervention of the Commercial Motor Users Association and the South Wales and Monmouth Bus Owners' Association. It points to the importance of the organization of owners to protect the trade's interests.

At the November meeting of the Council, in addition to communications from the bus owners and their allies, a letter Was received from the Ministry of Trans port on the point in dispute. The Ministry letter said that it would appear

from the Merthyr Corporation Act (Section. 32), that the Council had no right, by contract or otherwise, to cater for private parties outside the borough, and that, in the absence of statutory powers, it could not ply for hire with buses out of the borough without the sanction of the Ministry and the transport authority of the Council in whose area the buses were run.

The Council has given the undertaking required by the private proprietots, and is to obtain counsel's opinion on the legal status of its past trading ventures. The question of applying for extended powers of running was deferred for the time being.


comments powered by Disqus