HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Criminal Appeal1978

CHAN MAN-HOI 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
2903-EN-1978-05-13

CHAN MAN-HOI v. THE QUEEN

HTML content

CACC000308/1978

 

IN THE SUPREME COURTCriminal Appeal
 1978 No. 308

 

BETWEEN:  
 CHAN Man-hoiAppellant
 and 
 THE QUEENRespondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 13th May, 1978.

 

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

JUDGMENT

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

 

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to driving a private car for the carriage of passengers for hire and without third party insurance. He was fined $100 on the first charge and $320 on the second charge. In addition, he was disqualified from driving a private car for two years.

2. The appellant has had a run of bad luck and told the court that he needed the money since his wife had had a serious operation recently. This may be so, but to drive a private car for hire without third party insurance is a serious offence which may result, in the event of an accident, in dire consequences to any person who is injured.

3. The Motor Vehicle Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance lays down a mandatory penalty of at least one year's disqualification for this offence.

4. In the present case, I think that a period of two years is excessive. I allow the appeal to the extent that the period of disqualification is reduced from two years to one year. It will date from the date of the sentence.

 

 

 (Geoffrey Briggs)
 Chief Justice.

 

Representation:

Appellant in person

Kitchell for the Crown/Respondent