’BUS TANGLE

Gisborne Times, Volume LXIV, Issue 10260, 2 December 1926, Page 3

’BUS TANGLE

fAKAPUNA CASE

WHO IS LICENSING AUTHORITY? AUCKLAND, Doc. 1. The tangle that lias arisen at Takapuna in regard to the licensing of ’buses’is the subject of art appeal by the Borough Council against the Magistrate’s decision in dismissing a charge 'against the Waitemata- Bus Co. 'find A. H. Smith on a charge of running ’buses in contravention of the Omnibus Traffic Act. Mr. Finlay, for the Borough Council, said it had been urged that because the indefinite article “a” had been used in the section of the Act making it an offence to carry on a service, except under a license issued by “a licensing authority” any license for the running of motor omnibuses would apply to any district. He would submit that in the passage cited, “a” really meant “the”. If "it were read as “a” it must be construed as laid down •in the Acts Interpretation His Honor: You mean that SouthEnd could grant a license for Auckland ? Mr Finlay: That is so.

Counsel went on to cite a number of references in the Act .to “the.liccrisbig authority”, and contended that they indicated that an authority had sole control of the bus services in its district.

vMr Nortlicroft, for the bus _ pro- , prietors, submitted that ail applir cant should he allowed to apply to either of the licensing authorities. If he applied to No. 1 authority thej lptter would be required to notify the Devonport Borough Council, and, it might properly also notify the. Takapuna Borough Council, not as a" licensing authority, hut as a- neighbouring local body 7, in order that it might express an opinion on fares, routes, etc. * The hearing was adjourned.—P.A.