Tiger Transport Northern Ltd v R v Graham v R

• Jurisdiction: Jamaica
• Judge: Semper, J.
• Judgment Date: 10 April 1961
• Neutral Citation: JM 1961 CA 4
• Date: 10 April 1961
• Court: Court of Appeal (Jamaica)

Court of Appeal

MacGregor, C.J.; Semper, J.A.; Duffus, J.A.

Tiger Transport Northern Ltd

and

R

Graham

and

R

Appearances:

David Coore, QC for the appellants

FG Smith for the Crown

Road traffic - Public passenger vehicle – Motor omnibus – Carrying passengers in excess of the permitted seating capacity – Breach of reg 117 (1) of the Road Traffic Regulation [J] – Road Traffic Law, Cap 346 [J].

Semper, J.

1 delivered the judgment of the court: Both appellants appeal from conviction by the Judge of the Traffic court of offences under the Road Traffic Law, Cap 346 [J]. The appellant company was charged as a principal, the appellant Graham as aiding company in the that in operating a certain stage carriage lettered and numbered v 2833, P P v C 6206 on a road between May Pen and Chapelton in Clarendon the company was “contravened the provisions of reg 117 (1) of the Road Traffic Regulation, 1930 [J], in that the number of passengers carried in the said vehicle exceeded the seating capacity ascertained in according with the provisions of reg 28, part III, of the aforesaid regulations, country to s 93 (3) of Cap 346 [J].”

2 On 14 April 1960, Corporal Williams of the May Pen Constabulary saw a motor omnibus laden with passengers travelling on the main road from May Pen in the direction of Chapelton. He stopped the omnibus and enquired who was the conductor. The appellant Graham, who was not wearing a conductor's badge (as is required by the regulations), stated that he was. Corporal Williams counted the passengers. There were 65 standing and 49 seated and these numbers, which included the driver, did not include any children. Corporal Williams said that the licence disc which was affixed to the wind screen stated that the seating accommodation was 34. The licence disc also disclosed that the appellant company was the licensed owner. On the side of the omnibus was painted – “Licensed as a stage carriage to carry passengers”, but the number of passengers was not stated.

3 The Collector of Taxes for motor vehicle and motor cycle licences produced the application from the company for a grant of a road licence in respect of vehicle licensed v 2833. The application was on From K 1, in the Schedule to the Road Traffic Regulation. It is headed:

‘Application for the Grant of Road Licence (Stage and ordinary Express Carriage Services)’.

In the body of the document appears this sentence:

‘I, the undersigned, hereby apply for a licence to provide a stage or express carriage service between Kingston and Christiana’.

Question appear on the document for the applicant to answer. No 2 is: “Is the service to be one of express carriages?” The answer is “Stage carriage service”.

4 The application was granted on 16 February 1959, for Route No ST 43. The route for which application was made was from Kingston to Christiana and included that portion of the road from May pen to Chapelton along which the omnibus was travelling when it was stopped by Corporal Williams. The certificate of fitness dated 24 November 1958, for the vehicle v 2833 PPV C 6206 was also produced, and certified that the vehicle was fit to be licensed as a stages carriage. Tendered also in evidence was the licence of From M1 in the Schedule. It is a licence to operate a stage carriage service for three vehicles including the one licence v 2833. It is headed “Licence to Operate a stage Carriage Service”.

5 The only other fact that we will mention is that no evidence was adduced by the Crown that any passenger had paid a fare.

6 No evidence was called for the defence, but submissions were made which were reproduced in the grounds of appeal, all of which, except one, were abandoned by learned counsel for the appellants.

7 By s 52 (1) of the Road Traffic Law, Cap 346 [J], public passengers vehicles are divided into four classes: (a) stage carriages, (b) express carriages, (c) contract carriages, and (d) hackney carriages. The definition of each of these classes beings, “motor vehicles carrying passengers for hire or reward”, and then the manner of the carriage is described.

8 Part IV of the Road Traffic Regulations deals with public passengers vehicles.

9 Regulation 53 provides that in Part IV of the Regulation, unless the context otherwise requires, the expressions there after set out shall have the meanings assigned, and “vehicle” is described as meaning “public passenger vehicle”.

10 Regulation 109 to 119 occur under the sub-heading “Regulation governing the use of public passenger vehicle”.Regulation 117 (1) and 118 (1) provide:

11 ‘117.– (1).The seating capacity of a vehicle shall be calculated in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 28 part III, and the number of passengers carried on the vehicle shall not exceed the seating capacity so ascertained.

12 Provided that in the case of a Stage Carriage carrying a conductor, where additional passengers not exceeding 25 per cent of the number for which the vehicle had seating capacity and not...