|
1996 Tunbridge Wells v Dunn |
 |
 |
 |
|
1 Tunbridge Wells Council contended that a pedlar must remain in perpetual motion. 2 Council contended that a pedlar, by stopping, fell outside the protection provided by his Pedlars Certificate. 3 The Justices determined the facts a) that Dunn held a valid Pedlars Certificate b) that Dunn was not trading from a fixed position c) that Dunn moved up & down a busy shopping street e) he did not have a stand f) he did not have articles on the ground g) he stopped & waited for members of the public to approach him h) he regularly travelled to other towns. 4 The facts provided evidence that Dunn was a pedlar as defined in the Pedlars Act. 5 The Appeal by Tunbridge Wells Council was dismissed. download this case
|
