Cheuk Chi-keung v. The Queen

Read the full judgment text of CACC 102/1978 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.

1. The appellant, the driver of a public light bus, pleaded guilty in the court below to the charge of careless driving. He was convicted and fined $450. He was also disqualified from driving all vehicles for three months. He appealed against his conviction. He was not interested in the fine of $450 which, in my opinion, is a heavy fine but he was interested in the order for disqualification.

Case No.CACC 102/1978
Court
Court of Appeal
Date
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

CACC000102/1978

IN THE SUPREME COURT Criminal Appeal
  1978 No. 102

BETWEEN:    
  CHEUK CHI-KEUNG Appellant
  and  
  THE QUEEN Respondent

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 25th February, 1978.

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. The appellant, the driver of a public light bus, pleaded guilty in the court below to the charge of careless driving. He was convicted and fined $450. He was also disqualified from driving all vehicles for three months. He appealed against his conviction. He was not interested in the fine of $450 which, in my opinion, is a heavy fine but he was interested in the order for disqualification.

2. The act of careless driving consisted of pulling out from a pavement without looking properly which caused his public light bus to come in contact with another vehicle. No one was injured.

3. This is not a very serious offence of careless driving. The appellant has been licensed to drive since 1963 and has been a driver of a public light bus for several years. He appears to have had one previous conviction for careless driving and another conviction for some minor motoring offence. The fines imposed on those two occasions show that in neither case was the offence serious.

4. In the circumstances, I think the sentence of disqualification was an excessive punishment for the offence in question. So I ordered that the order for disqualification be set aside and to allow the appeal to that extent.

  (Geoffrey Briggs)
  Chief Justice.

Representation:

Appellant in person

Duncan for crown/respondent