WAM SAU-KWOK v. THE QUEEN
HTML content
CACC000231/1982
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG
(Appellate Jurisdiction)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 231 OF 1982
________________
Between
WAM Sau-kwok | Appellant | |
| AND | ||
| The Queen | Respondent |
____________
Coram: Baber, J. in Court
Date: 25 March 1982
______________
J U DG M E N T
______________
1. The Appellant drove his bus through red traffic lights at a crossroads and turned right causing an oncoming motor car to brake sharply to avoid collision. This was observed by a policeman on motorcycle patrol who eventually stopped the Appellant. The Appellant was originally charged with dangerous driving but was apparently prepared to plead guilty to careless driving and this was accepted by the police prosecutor and the magistrate, somewhat to my surprise, I must confess.
2. The Appellant had a clear record. His counsel at the appeal told me that the Appellant had been driving for some 10 years, so this is distinctly to his credit. The magistrate fined him $400 and disqualified him from driving any type of motor vehicle for 9 months. It is complained that in disqualifying the Appellant in these circumstances the magistrate was treating the case as one of dangerous driving. He certainly mentioned danger in several places in his record and findings. There may, however, be danger in careless driving and there certainly was in this case. A disqualification was justified. There is rarely any sense in limiting a disqualification to one type of motor vehicle. It would of course be nonsense to suggest that a disqualification is not penal, not to be considered as part of the overall punishment for a traffic offence. It has both economic and social consequences which may be serious. Fortunately for the appellant he has apparently been able to find other work connected with motor vehicles without toss of income. Nevertheless I consider 9 months total disqualification to be excessive in all the circumstances and reduce it to one of six months.
(E.G. Baber) |
Representation:
Mr. A. Ismail (Wong Hui & Souza) solicitors for the Appellant
Mr. F.C. Whitehouse, Crown Counsel for the Respondent