SALAWU AJIDE v INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE (LD/36CA/64) [1964] NGHC 31 (2 November 1964)

**SALAWU** **AJIDE** **(A****PPELLANT)** **_v_.** **INSPECTOR-GEN****ERA****L** **O****F** **POLIC****E** **(RESPONDENT****)** **(1964)** **All** **N.L.R.** **539** **Div****i****si****o****n:** High Court, Lagos **D****at****e** **o****f** **Judgment:** 2nd November, 1964 **C****as****e** **Num****b****er:** LD/36CA/64 **Before:** Taylor, C.J. The appellant was charged and convicted, in the Magistrate's Court, under Regulation 44 _(e)_ , Cap. 184, Laws of Nigeria, for driving a commercial vehicle without a spare tyre. It was contended at the trial, by the appellant, that since his vehicle is a commercial vehicle and not a hackney carriage he is not required to provide a spare tyre under the said regulation. **_HELD_**** _:_** A commercial vehicle which stands or plies for hire for the sole purpose of conveying passengers and their luggage, otherwise called an Omnibus, is not a hackney or stage carriage within the meaning of regulation 44(_e_), Cap. 184, Laws of Nigeria. _Appea_ _l_ _allowed_ _:_ _Convicti_ _o_ _n_ _an_ _d_ _sen_ _t_ _enc_ _e_ _se_ _t_ _aside_ _:_ _Verdic_ _t_ _o_ _f_ _no_ _t_ _guilt_ _y_ _an_ _d_ _acquitta_ _l_ _subst_ _i_ _tuted_ _._ _A_ _c_ _t_ _r_ _e_ _f_ _er_ _r_ _e_ _d_ _t_ _o_ _:__-_ _Ro_ _a_ _d_ _T_ _r_ _af_ _f_ _i_ _c_ _A_ _ct_ _,_ _Ca_ _p_ _._ _1_ _8_ _4_ _,_ _R_ _eg_ _u_ _la_ _t_ _io_ _n_ _s_ _4_ _0_ _,_ _4_ _3_ _,_ _4_ _4(__e_ _)_ _a_ _n_ _d_ _4_ _6_ _._ APPEAL from the Magistrate's Court. Taylor, C. J.:-The appellant was convicted of the offence of driving a commercial Vehicle No. LC. 4374 without a spare tyre contrary to Regulation 44(_e_), Cap. 184. Vol. 10 Laws of Nigeria, which reads thus:- "A licence for a hackney or stage carriage to stand or ply for hire shall be deemed to be issued subject to the following conditions in addition to any other conditions imposed and endorsed on the licence by the licensing authority in accordance with regulation 41 or laid down by regulation 43." It then goes on to provide for six conditions, (_e_) being the relevant one here and which states in effect that the vehicle must carry at least one spare inflated tyre, etc. The sole point that arose for decision by the Learned Magistrate was whether a commercial vehicle came within the meaning of the words hackney or stage carriage. The learned Magistrate on a submission made at the close of the case for the prosecution ruled _inter_ _alia_ that:- "I found it difficult to agree with the learned Counsel on his submission that the vehicle in question being merely a commercial vehicle and not a hackney carriage vehicle should not be provided with a spare tyre. I am of the view that the defendant has been brought under the appropriate section of the Regulation." At the hearing of this appeal I asked the State Counsel for the respondent whether he was supporting the conviction and he quite rightly answered in the negative. I said I would write a short Judgment in view of the fact that the decision involved the interpretation of Regulation 44 or of the words "hackney or stage carriage." For this purpose one needs only to look at Regulations 40, 43 and 46 to see that a hackney or stage carriage, in the case of the former is a vehicle that stands or plies for hire for the conveyance of passengers, and in the case of the latter, is a vehicle that stands or plies for hire "for the sole purpose of conveying passengers and their hand luggage" otherwise called an omnibus. A commercial vehicle such as is involved in this case is not a hackney or stage carriage, and for this reason the appeal must succeed. The Judgment of and sentence passed by the learned Magistrate are hereby set aside and a verdict of not guilty and an acquittal are hereby entered. The fine of £7.10.0d. which I am made to understand has been paid by the appellant is to be refunded to him.