The appellant, a leaseholder of a parcel within a large private property owned by a corporation, was charged with driving an off-road vehicle in the common area without a helmet, contrary to the Off-Road Vehicles Act.
He argued he was exempt from the helmet requirement because he was an 'occupier' of the common area.
The Court of Appeal held that the appellant was not an occupier of the common area, as he did not have physical possession, responsibility for its condition, or control over who could enter it.
The appeal was dismissed and the conviction upheld.
