Read the full judgment text of HCMA 644/2011 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 29 November 2011.
1. The appellant was prosecuted for the two offences respectively stated in two summonses. Summons ESS23091/2011 alleges that the appellant did use a taxi of which the body work or fittings did not comply with the regulations [1] . The other summons ESS23092/2011 alleges that the appellant did use a taxi of which the front lamps, as required to be installed by the regulation [2] , were not maintained in clean and efficient condition [3] .
Cites 2 cases