Business Changed, But Licence Granted
Page 43
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ACASE in which a haulier had made a material change in the character of his business during the currency of his A licence was decided in favour of the applicant by Sir William Hart, North-Western Deputy Licensing Authority, at Manchester, on Monday.
The issue was complicated by the fact that, the applicant, Mr. J. A. Heald, of Greenheys, Manchester, met with misfortune, owing to fluctuations in trade. He then sub-contracted to a new customer with the three vehicles authorized lay his licence.
Mr. P. Kershaw, for the railways, reminded Sir William Hart that many times in that court it had been laid down that an applicant for a renewal, who had changed the character of his operations, must prove " need up to the hilt, like a newcomer." The Appeal Tribunal had made precisely that point in the Bouts-Tillotson case.
Mr. Henry Backhouse, for the applicant, submitted that it was clearly proved that the three vehicles had been fully ,employed for the past 15 months. That was the strongest evidence of need. The fact that there had been a change was not justification for taking away a licence.
Although the railways had objected, they had tendered no evidence. The important point was whether the change in operation had put the business in competition with a totally different type of haulier. That was not so. The new licence was granted.