R. v. Leung Po Yiu, Esther

HCMA001259/1996

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.1259 OF 1996

______________

______________

Coram: Hon Gall, J. in Court

Dates of hearing: 18 February 1997 and 6 March 1997

Date of judgment: 6 March 1997

______________

J U D G M E N T

______________

1. The appellant was convicted on 3rd September 1996 of failing to supply information as to the identity of a driver who drove on the Tolo Harbour Road on 22nd July 1996 at a speed of 36 kph in excess of the speed limit. The appellant was fined a sum of $5,000 and sought a review on that fine on 17th September 1996.

2. The learned magistrate in her Reasons for Sentence found firstly, that the normal fine for a first offender who pleads guilty to a charge of speeding at 36 kph in excess of the speed limit is $2,500 as a car being driven at such high speed could easily go out of control. She also found that the normal and appropriate fine for a person who fails to supply the particulars of the driver should be double the usual fine for the offence for which the failure took place and therefore arrived at a fine of $5,000.

3. I requested from respondent statistics as to the normal fines for speeding in excess of 30 kph of the speed limit but not in excess of 45 kph and statistics for failure to give information within 21 days. I am much indebted to Ms Polly Wan for the efforts which she has made and the statistics which she has collated.

4. It appears from those statistics, territory wide, that speeding in excess of 30 kph normally attracts a fine in the range of $800 to $1,500 and failure to give information within 21 days attracts a normal fine of between $1,500 and $2,500. There are of course individual incidents of fines in the statistics which are higher or lower than the limits which are found to be normal. I have also in these statistics figures indicating the normal level of fines levied at various magistracies in the territory, but I do not think it would be helpful to enter into those figures as an appellant is entitled to be treated as all other persons within this territory.

5. The brief facts of the case that were read out to the magistrate do not appear to warrant a departure from the normal limits of sentencing. That being so, the appeal must be allowed to the extent that the fine is set aside and a fine of $2,000 is imposed in lieu of that imposed by the magistrate.

Representation:

Ms Polly Wan, C.C., for Crown

Mr Anthony Kwok, inst'd by M/s Jesse H.Y. Kwok & Co., for Appellant