HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1975

BERNHARD SENGEN v. THE QUEEN

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR10/1992THE QUEEN v. WONG MOK DIN
  • CAAR11/1986THE QUEEN v. CHUNG WAI-YIU
  • CAAR12/1986THE QUEEN v. HSU SAI-MAN AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR15/1986THE QUEEN v. WU KAM MING AND OTHERS
  • CAAR15/1987THE QUEEN v. LEUNG WING FAI
  • CAAR16/1987THE QUEEN v. PANG CHEUNG KIM
  • CAAR19/1986THE QUEEN v. CHAN CHI MAN
  • CAAR22/1986THE QUEEN v. WONG TAK-CHI
  • CAAR23/1986THE QUEEN v. MA LAI WU AND OTHERS
  • CAAR4/1986THE QUEEN v. LY XUONG THANH
  • CAAR5/1986THE QUEEN v. YEUNG KAM-WAH (D1) AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR8/1986THE QUEEN v. ALBERT STANLEY MALIA
  • CAAR9/1986THE QUEEN v. CHU TAI WAI AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR9/1989THE QUEEN v. CHAN KOON KWOK ARTHUR
  • CACC1000/1976LAI FAT v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC1000/1983THE QUEEN v. LEE HEI KEUNG
  • CACC1001/1979LAW WAI-MING AND ANOTHER v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1972LIU KAM-MAN v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1973LO WAI KEUNG v. THE QUEEN
  • CACC100/1977TAM YUK-MUI (F) v. THE QUEEN
3610-EN-1975-07-04

BERNHARD SENGEN v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000373/1975

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 373 OF 1975

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

 

BETWEEN  
 BERNHARD SENGENAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 4th July, 1975.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty by post to driving a private car over a continuous double white line in a carriageway in the New Territories. He was sentenced to a fine of $250.

2. There was no evidence that anyone was hurt or inconvenienced in any way and there was no evidence before the magistrate other than the bare plea of guilty. The appellant in his letter to the magistrate stated that he was on a sightseeing tour in the New Territories and when passing through Taipo Road there was a tremendously strong downpour and he was of the opinion that the offence was not unconnected with this circumstance.

3. In my view, the fine of $250 was excessive and I allowed the appeal to the extent of reducing the fine to $75.

 

 

 (Geoffrey Briggs)
 Chief Justice.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person.

E. Soh for crown.