The appellant appealed his conviction for making an unsafe lane change under the Highway Traffic Act.
On the trial date, the appellant's agent requested an adjournment because the officer's notes provided in disclosure were allegedly illegible, but neither the appellant nor his retained agent attended.
The Justice of the Peace refused the adjournment and proceeded with the trial, finding the appellant guilty based on the victim's evidence.
On appeal, the court held that the Justice of the Peace did not err in refusing the adjournment, noting the lack of prior notice and the presence of witnesses.
The court also found no error in the finding of guilt, as the victim's evidence was clear and uncontradicted.
The appeal was dismissed.
