BUS COMPETITION

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21328, 1 November 1932, Page 13

BUS COMPETITION

SIGHT-SEEING SERVICES OPERATORS URGED TO CONFER "The parties should come to some arrangement between themselves to avoid running in non-economic competition." said Mr. Justice Frazer in announcing the decision of the Transport Appeal Board yesterday to grant a third full-time licence for operating a sight-seeing bus between Auckland and Titirangi. "All three are entitled to licences, but the best thing would be for the operators to confer and try to run the services on an economic basis." Associated with Mr. Fra/.er on the Appeal Board were Mr. T. Jordan and Mr. Lisle Alderton. The appeal was by 11. A. Johnston, motor-bus owner, against a decision of the. No. 2 Licensing Authority, by which full-time licences had been granted to tho Auckland Motor Bus Company and J. Rimmer, but appellant had been licensed to operate only on Monday and Tuesday in each week and on bank holidays. Mr. Mackay, who represented appellant, claimed that in view of the fact that his client had been running on the route practically continuously since 1926, with satisfaction to all concerned, lie was entitled to an automatic fulbtimo licence. Mr. Knight, who represented Rimmer, and Mr. Bryce Hart, appearing for the Auckland Bus Company, said there was not room for even two full-time companies on the route and in the future someone would have to drop out. Evidence' wm called to show that the takings were small. in giving the decision for the appellant, Mr. Justice Frazer said it was obvious that tho No. 2 Licensing Authority considered that three licences were not necessary, but the position was that all three companies were entitled to licences under section 28 of the Act. The board had no power to grant two fulltime licences and to restrict Johnston's licence. Therefore tho appeal must succeed and costs and witnesses' expenses would be allowed to the appellant.