DAVID ANDREW HUSSEY v. THE QUEEN

CACC000550/1974

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.550 OF 1974

-----------------

 

BETWEEN:
	David Andrew Hussey	Appellant
	and
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 9th October, 1974.

 

-----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

 

1. The appellant in this case appeals against his conviction for careless driving. He was sentenced to a fine of $200 and had his licence endorsed on the 12th July, 1974. On the 22nd July, 1974 he gave notice of appeal to a judge against his conviction. In his notice of appeal two grounds of appeal were set out. The appeal came before me on the 9th October, 1974 and there was placed before me a document called "Amended Grounds of Appeal" dated the 8th October, 1974. No application had been made to the court to amend the appellant's notice of appeal.

2. The record of the case before the magistrate was received by the solicitors appearing on behalf of the appellant as long ago as the end of July, 1974. It would be difficult to produce a valid reason for making such a late application to amend the notice of appeal. However, the point is that no such application has ever been made to the court at all. It should be noticed by all persons who are presenting appeals from magistrates courts to a judge of the Supreme Court that the provisions of section 114 of the Magistrates Courts Ordinance should be strictly complied with and if an amendment to a notice of appeal is later desired an application should be made to the court as early as possible to that effect. This is not an academic matter, it is essential that the Crown should be advised of the true grounds of appeal well in advance of the appeal coming on for hearing.

3. In the present case the appeal was dismissed. It is unnecessary for the reasons to be stated since it was a case which depended entirely on its own facts.

 

 

Geoffrey Briggs, C.J.

 

Representation: