LAU WAI KWONG v. THE QUEEN

CACC001084/1977

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT	Criminal Appeal
	1977 No.1084

 

BETWEEN:
	LAU Wai Kwong	Appellant
	and
	THE QUEEN	Respondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 26th November, 1977.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. This case has caused me considerable uneasiness because of the existing state of the law, and in my view, the prosecution should never have been brought.

2. The appellant pleaded guilty to the offence of failing to report after a traffic accident contrary to section 27 of the Road Traffic Ordinance. The appellant was a public light bus driver and on the 12th September, 1977 he was driving his bus along the Yeung Uk Road, Tsuen Wan. When he was arriving at a junction he braked his vehicle very suddenly in order to avoid colliding with traffic which was in front of him. One of his passengers, a 6 year old girl, jerked forward and sustained a slight injury to her lips. The girl was accompanied by her mother, who asked the appellant to drive them to the Lady Trench Clinic for medical attention. This he did. He then drove off but he did not report what had happened to the police.

3. The magistrate fined him the sum of $200 and, in addition, imposed a disqualification for a period of twelve months.

4. This strikes me as a monstrous punishment for what was a most trivial offence, but the magistrate had no alternative since section 27(3) of the Road Traffic Ordinance imposes a mandatory period of disqualification for this offence. The state of the law seems to be that if I am driving my own car alone and I apply my brakes suddenly to avoid a child running across a road, and in so doing cause a slight abrasion to my face on the steering wheel, unless I report that matter to the police I am liable to be disqualified from driving from twelve months.

5. This strikes me as being absurd and it is to be hoped that the law will be brought into line with the present provisions of the English Road Traffic Act 1972 which are to be found in section 25 of that enactment.

6. In the event, in this case I allowed the appeal to the extent of quashing the fine of $200 and of making the order for disqualification to apply only to public light buses. Although the appellant was represented, I take this opportunity to point out the provisions of section 23(4) of the Road Traffic Ordinance which provides that the appellant can apply to the court to remove the disqualification in certain circumstances.

 

 

	(Geoffrey Briggs)
	Chief Justice

 

Representation:

K.H. Woo (Tsang & Chau) for Appellant

Lindsay for Crown