TRANSPORT CASE

Hokitika Guardian, 18 November 1932, Page 5

TRANSPORT CASE

RIVAL SERVICES CANCELLATION MOVE IN COURT, (Per Prsss Association — Copyright.) GISBORNE, November 17. . The hearing commenced before the No. 4 Transport Licensir. / Authority of an application by the Hawke’s Bay and Duco Companies for the cancellation of Whitfield’is Motor Service license. Mr Burnard, for Whitfields, objected to the Authority’s jurisdiction, on the ground of bias and of interest. Mr Burnard said that writs \for £Boo' had been issued against Messrs Logan, Chambers and Matthews, the members constituting the present tribunal, for the damage occasioned Whitfield by the cancellation of hist license in July last, which license was., afterwards restored by the Supreme Court. He contended that these members were disqualified by their interest, for by the cancelling of Whitfield’s license now and so terminating his goodwill, they would diminish the damages for which they were allegedly liable. Mr Logan announced that they proposed to proceed with the hearing. They had a duty to perform, and they--considered that the issue of the writ , did not justify art adjournment. Mr Langley/ for the-'.complainant companies, stated it would be proved that 434 trips had been omitted by ’ Whitfield.

During the proceedings, the admission was made by Mr MacArthur, manager of the Hawke’s Bay Company, that certain parties interested in the complainant companies had executed an indemnity against costs in favour of the three members in connection with the Supreme Court action that was brought by Whitfield to restore his license.

Motor drivers in the complainant companies’ employ gave evidence that on numerous occasions they had failed to see Whitfield’s car, and, in their opinion, he had on such occasions failed to run.

The case for the complainant has concluded.