Revocation Changed to Suspension
Page 15
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE Transport Tribunal has partially allowed two appeals by General Haulage Co. (Lemington) Ltd., against the revocation and consequent nonrenewal of a four-vehicle A licence by the Northern Licensing Authority. Mr. I. Robey, for the appellants, said that in April, 1961, an application was made to vary the licence by substituting artic vehicles for platform vehicles. The then secretary of the company had told the Authority that the type of business would not be changed and gave an undertaking that the vehicles would not be greater than the standard overall length of 35 ft.
It subsequently came to the Authority's notice that the appellants had been using long-length vehicles in breach of the undertaking and that they were not being operated from the stipulated Tyneside base but from Tees-side. At an inquiry' it was said that longer vehicles had been operated only a month after undertaking not to use them had been given. The Authority was told that at the time the undertaking was made the shares in the company were wholly owned by Mr. J. W. Capstaff and his wife. In the early part of May, 1961, negotiations were entered into with a Mr. Tulip, the present managing director of the company, for the sale of the shares. The sale was completed and the shares transferred in September, 1961. Mr. Tulip gave evidence that at the time he agreed to purchase the shares he knew nothing about the undertaking. He had since taken over vehicles and a hire-purchase liability of which there was. at the time of the inquiry, about £16,000 outstanding. The Authority found that Mr. Tulip started a new business on Tees-side and, having obtained a licence for one purpose, he used it for another. The licence was revoked.
Mr. Robey submitted that the circumstances of the case could not justify the substantial .penalty imposed. The decision operated harshly against the appel. tants.
Giving the Tribunal's. judgment, Mr. Squibb, the president, said that having regard to the wide declared normal user, the Tribunal did not feel that the change of base was such as to justify revocation of the licence. Although the legal entity had remained unchanged throughout, having regard to the Merchandise Transport judgment, the Tribunal had to look at the realities of the situation. If it accepted that Mr. Tulip had acted innocently, albeit carelessly, the appropriate course was not to deprive him of the business but to impose a penalty which would go some way towards depriving him of the fruits which he had earned by operating in breach of the undertaking. The licence would be suspended for six months, commencing from tomorrow. Opening the second appeal, Mr. Robey said that the Authority had sought to distinguish the case from the ordinary type of application for a licence re-grant. The application had been made with a view to regularizing the appellants position after attention had been drawn to the irregularities of operation. A declaration of user had been set out in two parts, the first giving a user if the units were not operated over 35 ft. in length, and a second user if they exceeded that length. Figures were submitted showing full employment of the vehicles.
Mr. J. R. C. Samuel-Gibbon, for Siddle C. Cook Ltd., Sunter Brothers Ltd. and A. Stevens (Haulage) Ltd., respondents, submitted that the Authority had found there had been a breach of an under
taking given first of all to secure the withdrawal of an objection by Siddle C. Cook. For the past two years Cook had lost work from two customers, partly due to the unauthorized change of user. After hearing further arguments the Tribunal said that it was not satisfied that the mere production of figures was enough to show a need in this case. However, the respondents had indicated that they had no objection to the use of vehicles Up to 35 ft. in length and it had come to the conclusion that a licence should be granted to this effect.
Advised to Reapply WITHOUT calling on the respondents, VI' the Transport Tribunal, sitting in London on Tuesday, dismissed an appeal by S. A. Peachey against,the refusal of the Metropolitan deputy Licensing Authority to grant a B licence authorizing one vehicle. The Tribunal suggested that the appellant, who had produced no evidence before the Authority, should reapply to the Authority, bringing witnesses or letters in support.
Not Heard AN appeal by F. and R. D. Walsh against a decision of the North Western deputy Licensing Authority, was not proceeded with. A preliminary point, that the licence, the subject of the appeal, had expired, was upheld by the Tribunal, which ruled that no effective order could be made. Mr. E. Taylor, for Walsh, said that he was acquainted with the Tribunal's judgments in the Walker and Howlet appeals, and had had an opportunity of seeing the Tribunal's reasons for dismissing a motion to review and rescind its decision not to proceed in the Regan Brothers appeal. He therefore thought it would not be practical to go over the same arguments again.
Heavy Demand
Iv C. STANDERWICK LTD. and IT • Scout Motor Services Ltd sought, in an application last week, to remodel some of their express services between Colne, Blackpool, Fleetwood and London by aggregating vehicle duplication. The case was heard at Manchester before the North Western Traffic Commissioners.
Mr. F. D. Walker, for the applicants, pointed out that the London services were well established but, in addition to the one vehicle journey operated at each scheduled departure time, they wished to have the following vehicle journeys operated in aggregate: January 558, February 504, March 558, April 660, !vIay'772, June 1,140, July 1,705, August 2,449, September 1,500, October 620, November 600 and December 620. There would also be extra public holiday duplication. Out of each monthly allowance they wanted to operate a proportion of sectional duplicate vehicles for the purpose of conveying passengers from authorized taking-up points in the West Midland Traffic Area to places in the North West, and vice versa.
During every week-end from Easter to October, without exception, substantial sections of the services in question were .closed to bookings, continued Mr. Walker. This position had been growing more acute over the past few years, and the overall level of traffic between 1961 and 1962 had increased by 20 per cent. The new section of the BirminghamPreston motorway would soon be available and a shorter journey time would be offered. Passengers wishing to go to South Coast resorts and the Continent also used the services. Taking all these facts into consideration it was time that the restrictions on the licences should be reviewed.
The application is to be continued.
Excursions Application Granted In Park
'THE East Midland Traffic Commis" sioners have granted part of an application by Back's Coaches (Witney) Ltd., to introduce new period excursions to four holiday resorts.
The company had applied for 10 period excursions of eight to .15 days' duration at a hearing before the Traffie Commis • skaters in Oxford on March 12 and 13.
• Objectors . included ' British Railways, .Associated Motorways, City of Oxford
• Motor. Services, Eastern National Omni
• hue Co.; Maidstone and District Motor
• ..Services Ltd:, Southdown Motor Services _ Ltd., and the Thames Valley Traction Co. Ltd.
Excursions were granted in respect of Bournemouth, Bognor, Southsca and Weymouth, for July and August only.
• The other applications were refused. The Commissioners said the applicants had established a need for direct facilities to coastal resorts from Witney.