RENTAL CAR LICENCES

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28542, 22 March 1958, Page 15

RENTAL CAR LICENCES

Appeal Authority’s

Decisions

Although Manchester Car Sales, Ltd., may again apply to the No. 9 Trasport Licensing Authority (Mr J. A. Bretherton) for a rental vehicle licence, its appeal against his refusal in September to grant the licence has been dismissed by the Transport Licensing Appeal Authority (Judge Archer). In a written decision Judge. Archer said that, although the company could again apply, he could see no reason for referring the current application again to the authority. If the company did apply again, and received favourable consideration, Judge Archer suggested that the Licensing Authority should inquire further into the position of the Woolston licence which the company had acquired recently. He doubted if it would be desirable for the company to have one licence for Woolston and another for the city.

It was not his intention, said Judge Archer, to suggest that this company had any preference over other applicants. The company had complained of the summary dismissal of its application made in September, when other similar applications were heard in part and then held over until December. The com pany’s own evidence, said Judge Archer, was insufficient to establish the need for more licences. No. Jurisdiction An appeal against a refusal by the same authority to grant a licence to B. D. Williamson was struck out. Judge Archer said he had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The appellant applied for a rental vehicle licence and his application was refused on September 2. ' Certain other applications which were heard in part on the same date were not finally dealt with until December 23, when the No. 9 Authority disposed of a number of applications in one composite decision.

The appellant then filed an appeal, said Judge Archer, claiming inter alia, that he had been prejudiced because the decision on his application had not been held over to be dealt with at the same time as those decided in December.

The appellant did not appear to have any right of appeal in relation to those decisions, said Judge Archer, and he said that the authority had indicated that a licence or licences for the 10 more cars should be granted to new licensees, and the appellant was entitled to make a fresh application.