BUS SERVICE

Southland Times, Issue 20080, 18 January 1927, Page 6

BUS SERVICE

AN AUCKLAND CASE. BIAS ALLEGED AGAINST LICENSING AUTHORITY. (Per United Press Association.) Auckland, January 15. An application by Henry Smith, representing the Yellow ’Bus Service from Devonport to Takapuna, for a writ to prohibit the Takapuna Borough Council from acting as No. 2 Licensing Authority under the Motor Omnibus Traffic Act, was heard at the Supreme Court before their Honours, Mr Justice Stringer and Mr Justice Reed, the grounds for the action being the alleged bias as shown, particularly in the circular issued by the Mayor of the borough that the council had already predetermined the case. Sir John Findlay submitted it was obvious that the intention of the Act was to support local authorities and to make them sole licensing bodies. He submitted that even if bias did not exist that did not affect the legal standing of the Takapuna Council. Mr Justice Stringer said there was no doubt that the Act has invaded one of the principles of common law, namely that pecuniary interest in a concern should be a disqualification for legal jurisdiction. . Sir John Findlay: “That may be so, but if the legislature with a full knowledge of all the facts places this Act on the Statute Book there is, I submit, no appeal from it.” Mr Justice Stringer: “But even if the Legislature has declared that financial interests are no disqualification, there are other principles upon which this Court can adjudicate.” Sir John Findlay: “I submit that to over-rule the provisions of the Act would be to assume a legislative function above that of the State.” Mr Justice Reed said the GovernorGeneral could make an Order-in-Council whereby an authority could be talien over. It was even possible for an authority such as Takapuna to be absorbed in Auckland city. A verdict was given for the plaintiff.