This was an appeal against the forfeiture order on the appellant’s motor vehicle as per s 75 (1) of the Wildlife Conservation and National Parks Act, 1992 (Act No. 28 of C 1992). The appellant argued that his motor vehicle was not liable to forfeiture; since there was no evidence to support the forfeiture order or to prove that he actively participated in the killing or skinning of the ostriches or that his vehicle was used in tracking the birds. The court determined whether appellant's motor vehicle was used for the purpose of or in connection with the commission of the offence.