Conviction for use of a vehicle not in compliance with legal requirements

Facts

The District Court of Zurich convicted A. and B. on 20 April 1988 for offences against the RTA (Art. 93 para. 2 in conjunction with Arts. 12 para. 1 and 29). They filed a nullity appeal. The Cantonal Court of Zurich partially upheld the appeal on 15 November 1988, retaining only the offence under Art. 93 para. 2 in conjunction with Art. 29 RTA, while confirming the fines imposed by the single judge. A. and B. then filed a nullity appeal against this judgment.

Considerations

According to case law, a vehicle is considered non-compliant with the regulations (Art. 93 para. 2 RTA) when it does not comply with the provisions on the construction and equipment of vehicles. Even vehicles with professional dealer plates must in principle comply with these requirements, except for well-defined exceptions.

The law expressly provides for an exception for test runs necessary to detect and verify defects, provided that the steering and brakes are at least in working order, that a stop light is present, that the lighting is in compliance at night or in bad weather, and that there is no excessive noise. Beyond that, practice accepts other cases where full compliance with the regulations is not always possible,…