AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Important Ap peals Decided

6th November 1959
Page 39
Page 39, 6th November 1959 — Important Ap peals Decided
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?

British Transport Commission

Titlii!re won their appeals in the cases of Pike and Roberts, in that these hauliers' licences have been temporarily withheld, but lost that of Morcom. Decisions by the Transport Tribunal were issued on Wednesday.

The Pike and Roberts appeals were

similar in that changes in normal user were involved. As reported in Theā€¢ Commercial Motor dated October 16, Mr. H. Pike had successfully applied to the Yorkshire Licensing Authority to extend the radius specified by his normal user from 25-80 miles.

T. Roberts (Haulage Contractors), Ltd., had been allowed by the same Authority to add a vehicle to their A licence to carry certain traffic over a wide area, whereas previously the normal user stipulated a 10-mile radius of Renishaw.

"Generally speaking it is desirable in the public interest that where it appears that a licensee has not fulfilled his stated intention he should to some extent be penalized for his failure to do so," say the Tribunal.

A declaration of normal user was a statement of an applicant's intentions, and failure to fulfil it was a matter which an Authority must regard. Roberts had not sought to deny the inconsistency between their stated intentions and subsequent operation.

The managing director of the company had not done wrong deliberately, but had to be penalized. The licence granted to him would be withheld until January 1, 1960. It was issued on December 31, 1958.

Mr. Pike's licence has also been withheld until January 1, 1960. His wrongdoing in exceeding the terms of the previous normal user is likewise not regarded as deliberate.

As also reported in the October 16 issue, the B.T.C. contested the Western Licensing Authority's grant of an A licence to Mr. R. G. Moreorn for a vehicle to carry agricultural products and other loads.

This operator was a timber merchant, and it had been argued whether he was legally entitled tb -carry timber under his A licence. The Tribunal do not settle this point, but state that it will arise in the course of another application by Mr. Morcom. (This was due to be heard on Wednesday.).

The Authority's grant is upheld. The importance of broccoli transport is stressed.