QUESTION OF LAW

Southland Times, Issue 20395, 26 January 1928, Page 7

QUESTION OF LAW

INTERPRETATION OF MOTOR REGULATIONS. MAGISTRATE RESERVES HIS DECISION. An interesting point of law was involved in a case heard in the Police Court yesterday morning before Mr G. Cruickshank, S.M., when Charles A. Warden (Mr B. W. Hewat) was charged with driving a motor lorry in Dee street without having a heavy traffic license. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Inspector Stopford said that on December 30 last defendant was using a one-ton truck to carry his wool to the store. The vehicle and the load were over two tons and to carry such a load a heavy traffic license was necessary. Defendant used the truck chiefly for work about his farm and to carry milk to the factory in the mornings. Mr Hewat said the case w'as one of great interest to the farming community. He questioned the statement of the inspector that the vehicle could be defined as a motor lorry under the regulations. The inspector held that if the vehicle, together with its load, weighed over two tons, then a heavy traffic license was required. This contention gave rise to difficulties, for an ordinary car carrying some heavy load such as lead might quite easily have a total weight of over two tons and would then presumably be classed as a motor lorry. Two vehicles of the same design might be differently classified because of the fact that they carried different loads, or the same vehicle might on different occasions come under different classifications according to its load. This, counsel contended, was not what was meant by the regulations. He suggested that the “maximum load” mentioned in the regulations should be taken to mean the maximum load as specified by the makers of the motors. Defendant had previously held a heavy traffic license, but he had understood from others that this was not necessary and he had not taken one out this year. The Magistrate reserved his decision.