Facts
A. was convicted by the Police Judge of the Broye region for failure to return a license or registration plates. Although the vehicle was registered in the name of company B. SA, of which A. was the sole administrator, the facts show that C. was the actual holder. Nevertheless, the Cantonal Court held that A. was guilty as a co-perpetrator, as he had not taken the necessary measures to inform the authority of the name of the actual holder and return the plates, despite the summons from the Office of Traffic and Navigation.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal dismissed A.'s appeal against this conviction. It considered that Art. 97 para. 1 let. b RTA does not limit the status of perpetrator of the offence to the sole "holder" of the vehicle within the meaning of Art. 78 para. 1 RTAO. When the holder registered in the registration certificate does not correspond to the actual holder, the authority notifies the withdrawal decision to the registered holder in accordance with Art. 107 para. 3 RTAO. This registered holder, as the addressee of the decision, may be guilty of failure to return if he does not notify the authority that he is not the actual holder and does not return the licenses and plates.
In the present case, although company B. SA was not the actual holder, it was registered as such on the registration certificate. As the sole…