GRANTING OF NEW TAXI LICENCES

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26212, 8 September 1950, Page 8

GRANTING OF NEW TAXI LICENCES

APPEAL DISMISSED AUTHORITY’S DECISIONS UPHELD An appeal by Blue Star Taxis (Incorporated) against the granting of 20 new taxi-cab licences, by the Christchurch Metropolitan Licensing Authority was dismissed at a sitting of the Transport Appeal Authority (Judge Archer) yesterday. The 20 licences were granted by the Authority on July 4, after 166 applicants had been interviewed. Blue Star Taxis were represented by Mr J. S. Haywood. The 20 successful applicants were also represented by counsel. Mr Haywood said that by specifying the number of licences to be issued, the Authority had predetermined the matter, and the procedure indicated a biased frame of mind.

“I am not here to sit in judgment on the Authority, who is not present,” said Judge Archer.

Mr Haywood questioned the right of Cr. J. N. Clarke to sit on the Metropolitan Licensing Authority and also on the Rehabilitation Committee which selected 20 candidates for the proposed licences.

“I cannot leave this matter in an unsatisfactory state,” said Judge Archer. "You must say that the appellant objected to Cr. Clarke being on both committees. or withdraw any allegations.” Mr Haywood said that the appellant did object.

Appeal Procedure Questioned In submissions, Mr R. A. Young, who appeared for Gold Band Taxis, Ltd., said that the appeal by Blue Star Taxis was not in order, as the organisation was not the holder of a transport licence. For this reason, the organisation could not be an appellant. The only circumstances, in which Blue Star Taxis could be an appellant, would be if a resolution had been passed by a meeting of the organisation. Mr Young’s objection was made towards the end of the hearing. “The objection by Mr Young is a sound and valid objection, although I am rather pleased that it was not raised before the substance of the appeal had been heard,” said Judge Archer. Persons who were entitled to appeal were clearly set out in the act, and he was satisfied that the Blue Star Taxis organisation was not in the classification mentioned there. Judge Archer said he was pleased to have heard the whole argument, and was satisfied that the appeal would not have succeeded on its merits. The procedure adopted by the Metropolitan Licensing Authority had been questioned, continued Judge Archer. He would be failing in his duty if he did not point out that it was incumbent on the Authority to adopt proper procedure.

“I consider that the Authority’s attention has been drawn sufficiently to \ he *i_ err ? r ’” he said - .Members of the Authority saw that it was necessary for it to afford all parties the opportunity to be heard. The Authority did this, and in fact heard substantial evide£ce for and against the applications, the appellant company was not satisfied that the Authority had corrected its error, it should apply for a decision in the Supreme Court He was satisfied that the Authority had heard a weight of evidence which supported the decision. If the Authority had gone against the evidence it w ould n °t have been correct. „ successful applicants were:— Gold Band Taxis, Ltd. (two licences), M. C. Bailey, E. T. J. Brady, E. A Burt, G. R Fisher, K. Kingsley, L. D. N. Hart C H Last W- McHugh L. G. S. Williams A. Lay: G D. Marchant. V. F. Searle. J D. Shearer, A. H. Sibley, A. M. Stewart, Tate ’ J - J - Watson, and M. W. White.