ROAD TRANSPORT REGULATIONS

Press, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23194, 4 December 1940, Page 14

ROAD TRANSPORT REGULATIONS

■ # COUNSEL’S COMMENT ON PROSECUTION “SAND IN WHEELS OF INDUSTRY” A prosecution against British Pavements (Canterbury), Ltd., was described by the company’s counsel (Mr A. C. Brassington) as “a handful of sand thrown into the wheels of industry,” when it was brought in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, Mr E. C. Levvey, S.M., was on the Bench. The case was finally adjourned to enable legal argument to be prepared on a question which concerns many companies engaged in heavy transport. The charge was that the company had exceeded the terms of its transport licence. Mr A. B. Archer, a Transport Department inspector, said that because the truck had no vehicle authority when stopped he could not ascertain where it was entitled to operate. On investigating, he found it was allowed to carry the company's own plant to the company’s jobs. It was bound for Domett (70 miles from Christchurch), which was served by rail, and therefore the company should have applied for a temporary licence for the job. To Mr Brassington. Mr Archer admitted that the company's depot at Islington was one mile and a half from the nearest available station, at Hornby. The truck was carrying a heavy piece of machinery to be used on a pavement job. and other plant. Mr Brassington asked if it was suggested that the company should send the plant to Hornby, rail it to Christchurch, where it would lie overnight,

and then rail it to Domett. That would mean sending three men and heavy loading tackle to Hornby (where there was no crane), and sending the empty truck to Domett to get the : plant from the train again. Mr Levvey said that this point had been thrashed out before in a case against the Williamson Construction Company. In that instance the case had been adjourned, and after a temporary licence had been obtained by the company the prosecution -was dropped. "We are not prepared to do that,” said Mr Brassington. There was an important legal argument to settle, he said. Mr Archer said In reply to Mr Brassington that the company was not entitled to send the truck up empty. “That is an amazing statement,” said Mr Brassington. "It weighs over two tons,’’ said Mr Archer. "The facts are important because this prosecution constitutes a handful of sand thrown into the wheels of industry,” said Mr Brassington. “A conviction would impede the company in its work ” The charge should be withdrawn. he contended. The Magistrate said that the inspector could not be expected to conduct a legal argument. The case would be adjourned sine die. so that the inspector could refer it to a senior officer and then see whether it was to be proceeded with.