1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196 
COACH NOT LICENSED, RULES QUEEN'S BENCH
Page 68
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN express coach carrying railway workshops ' staff between Wolverton and Newport Pagnell last February was not covered by a road service licence, the Queen's Bench Divisional Court ruled on Tuesday.
The Court upheld the conviction by Justices sitting at Newport Pagnell on June 23 last of the owner of the coach, Mr. Irvine T. J. Wood. He had been fined £5 for using the coach without a road service licence.
Dismissing with costs Mr. Wood's appeal from the Justices' decision, Lord Parker (the Lord Chief Justice) said Mr. Wood sought to operate a service between Newport Pagnell and Wolverton when the railway closed in 1964. United Counties Omnibus Co. Ltd. offered to allow him to operate a service under their licence if he did not himself apply for a licence.
One condition was that only employees of the Wolverton Railway Carriage and Wagon Works were to be carried. The coach was to carry a notice saying "On hire to United Counties".
Mr. Wood began using his coach under the agreement, but on October 22 United Counties wrote to say that the arrangements would be terminated from October 30. They said they had wrongly estimated the need for the service, and could do the work themselves. They also asked for return of the "On hire" notices.
But Mr. Wood continued to operate and to use the notices. He was operating in this way on the date of the alleged offence.
His defence was that there had been a hiring of his vehicle to United Counties, and it was covered by their licence.
"However, it is quite clear that his right to drive the vehicle under the original arrangement had come to an end", Lord Parker continued. "There may be civil actions that can be brought against United Counties—I don't know. But one thing is clear—that he could not say on February 25 he was operating this vehicle as agent for United Counties."
Mr. Justice Sachs and Mr. Justice Nield agreed.