AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Clearing Hou se as Haulier

2nd December 1949
Page 32
Page 32, 2nd December 1949 — Clearing Hou se as Haulier
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?

I N a case heard before the Appeal Tribunal, last week, the Railway Executive appealed against a decision of the Yorkshire Licensing Authority in granting Archbolds (Transport), Ltd., Leeds, a licence to run 22 vehicles and four trailers.

The principle involved was whether a clearing house can by the purchase of haulier customers obtain the licences formerly held by them.

Mr. J, F. Archbold, bead of the

• respondent company, ran a clearing house and in 1942 bought the vehicles of about eight companies to operate in connection with his organization. Previously he had operated no vehicles.

In November, 1943, the Licensing Authority granted him Defence Permits to run the vehicles he had acquired, despite opposition from the railway companies. They had notified the Licensing Authority that the granting of licences to some of the component companies of Arch bolds (Transport), Ltd. had been a matter of contention and one case was under appeal. They stated that the time was not then fit for such an amalgamation to be made and suggested that peace-time would be more suitable for its With the expiry of the Defence Permits, licences were granted. Mr. R. P. Humphreys, for the Railway Executive, submitted that this was unjustified. When the vehicles were acquired by Archlsolds (Transport), Ltd., no goodwill had been purchased.

A30 Evidence of need should have been produced, he said, together with proof that the amalgamated company could operate more efficiently than was formerly the case, or that suitable transport was unobtainable.

A day and a half were devoted to the reading of the transcript of the hearing before the Yorkshire Licensing Authority. The case has been adjourned until December 6 when Mr. Humphreys and Mr. David Karmel, for the respondents, will make their submissions.

BIG FORD BONUS ISSUE

4-1. A CAPITAL bonus of one 16s.

4-I-per-cent. redeemable preference share is to be awarded for each nominal of ordinary stock held by shareholders in the Ford Motor Co., Ltd. This bonus will not go to the American Ford company.

Investments in the European and other Ford organizations, at present held by Ford Investment Co., Ltd., Guernsey, which is. a wholly owned subsidiary of the Ford Motor Co., Ltd., will be taken over by the American Ford concern.

When the sale of the shares of the Ford asSociated companies to the American concern has been completed, the Ford Investment Co., Ltd., will have assets of £4,256,860 received from the American organization, and cash and investments amounting to about £1,500,000.


comments powered by Disqus