Appellants Ignorant of Business — Mr. 401
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
QTATING that one of the defects of b.—) the company's case was that they knew practically nothing about their haulage business, Mr. Hubert Hull, president of the Transport Tribunal, last week announced the dismissal of an appeal by Swift's Forwarding, Ltd., Strand Street, Liverpool, against the refusal of the North Western Deputy Licensing Authority to grant them a B licence for a van to carry general goods within 50 miles of Liverpool.
Mr. M. Kennan, for the company, said that one of their substantial customers were agents for an American steamship company whose vessels called at Liverpool and went on to Manchester Docks. The agents had difficulty every fortnight in clearing goods from the docks.
The vehicle concerned in the application was required for use between Liverpool and Manchester to carry small consignments, and so release Swift's larger vehicle.
In his decison, the Authority had said that there was inadequate evidence to support the application, but Mr. Kennan submitted that he had misdirected himself on what constituted a prima facie case, because he had considered matters in respect of which the onus was upon the objectors.
Mr. Hull said that it was perfectly clear that there was an entire absence of evidence to support the need for the vehicle.
Respondents were the British Transport Commission, Messrs. J. W. Walker and Sons, Messrs. Joseph Dodd, Messrs. S. and R. Smyth and Lowey's Removals, Ltd. They were not called upon.