TRANSPORT CASE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22210, 10 September 1935, Page 11

TRANSPORT CASE

MAMAKU HILLS EOAD BOARD'S ACTION UPHELD r POWERS OF AUTHORITIES CARRIER'S APPLICATION FAILS [FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT] HAMILTON, Monday Judgment for defendant was given by Mr. Justice Callan in the Supreme Court at Hamilton to-day in the case in which James Cyril Fleming, carrier, of Rotorua, applied for a writ of certiorari against the Transport Coordination Board to prevent the board from giving effect to a judgment it had given in Fleming's case. Fleming had applied to the No. 2 Licensing Authority for a licence to conduct a goods transport service between Rotorua and Auckland. The authority refused to grant the licence, and Fleming applied to the Co-ordina-tion Board, which dismissed the appeal. Fleming brought the action to the Supreme Court on the grounds that the board had exceeded its jurisdiction, and that its decision was against the natural rules of justice. Mr. M. H. Hampson appeared for Fleming, Mr. C. H. Taylor for the Railways Board, and Mr. R. A. Potter for Dawson and Sons, carriers, of Rotorua. The Co-ordination Board was. not represented, as it was regarded as a judicial body. Questions Submitted The case, which consisted wholly of legal argument, was partly heard on Saturday, when Mr. Hampson submitted that there were two questions for the Court to decide:—(a) How far the suitability of the road to carry the traffic for which it was classified came within the ambit of the Co-ordination Board; (b) whether or not the board exceeded judicial principles at the hearing. When the case was resumed to-day further legal argument was heard. Mr. Taylor disagreed with Mr. Hampson's contention that consideration of the suitability of the road to carry the traffic for which it was classified was not within the ambit of the Transport Co-ordination Board's powers. Mr. Potter concurred. His Honor said the case was not an appeal. The special legislation dealing with transport licensing set up special Courts to deal with questions of which they had special knowledge and experience. These Courts, for that was what the licensing authorities were, knew better than any other Court about these questions, and no other Court had any power to interfere with them unless they exceeded their jurisdiction. His Honor held that plaintiff had sufficient warning that his application for a licence would be opposed and the grounds of the opposition. " Not Concern of Supreme Court " It could not bo disputed, said His Honor, that the Transport Licensing Act, 193], gave the board power to consider the condition of the roads over which proposed services were to run. Whether the board's riew of the condition of the Mamaku Hills road was right or not was not the concern of the Supreme Court. Evidence had been given to the board that the road had been constructed at considerable expense and was difficult to maintain. The board had to consider the physical condition of the road.

. Mr. Hampson had contended that the classification of the road determined its suitability, but the law allowed the board to take into account matters which came before it, and His Honor held that Mr. Hampson's contention was unsound. That being so, the second point he raised was also unsound. Judgment was given against plaintiff, with £2l costs.

APPLICATIONS AT ROTORUA RAILWAY INTERESTS £by telegraph OWN correspondent] ROTORUA, Monday Applications for tho renewal of goods service licences in the Rotorua district, in some cases involving amendments to existing licences, were heard before tho No. 4 Transport Licensing Authority in a sitting commenced in Rotorua this morning. 'lhe authority has before it a lengthy list of applications, and somo of these which concern services over the Mamaku Hill route and in tho Matamata County are expected to bo strongly opposed by interested parties in those districts.

The application of W. L. Richards, of Rotorua (Mr. J. A. Speer), for a renewal of an area licence covering tho Rotorua and Whakatane counties was the subject of a restriction suggested by Mr. M. H. Grigg, of the Railway Department, who stated that the department was seeking to retain for tho East Coast railway the carriage of goods to which he claimed it was entitled. He therefore suggested for the consideration of the authority that it should be stipulated that the operator was not to carry goods from the area north of a line drawn east and west between Taneatua and Te Teko which were intended for consignment west of Rotorua. The authority reserved its decision on the point raised.

In connection with the application of L. JDanaher for an area licence in the Whakatane County, tho Railway Department suggested that a similar restriction concerning tho transport of goods north of Te Teko and Taneatua should be imposed and. decision was also deferred.

STATUTES AND REGULATIONS BOOK NEEDED ON SUBJECT [from our own correspondent! HAMILTON, Monday The need for a book on the transport laws of New Zealand formed thij subject of comment at the Hamilton Supremo Court to-day, when reference had to be made to several volumes of statutes and regulations to ascertain what was required of transport licensees in order to comply with the law. Mr. Justice Callan remarked that someone should write a book on the subject, as tho present method of ascertaining what the law was was extremely cumbersome. Mr. C. H. Taylor, counsel for th<s Railways Board, agreed, but he mad« 3 no answer when His Honor suggested that he (Mr. Taylor) should be asked to undertake the task of writing a book.