HKSAR v. Koo Chuk Fong

Read the full judgment text of HCMA 1107/2004 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 22 December 2004.

1. I have considered the six grounds of appeal raised by the appellant and also the submissions made orally to me this morning.  I cannot say that these grounds lead me to the conclusion that the conviction is unsafe or unsatisfactory.  The magistrate was entitled to say that because of the discrepancy on the speed the appellant was driving at existing between his interview with the police and his evidence in court she drew the irresistible inference that the appellant was driving without due ca

Case No.HCMA 1107/2004
Court
High Court CFI
Date22 Dec 2004
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCMA1107/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.1107 OF 2004

(ON APPEAL FROM STS 9529 OF 2003)

______________________

BETWEEN

  HKSAR Respondent
  and  
  KOO CHUK FONG (古祝芳) Appellant

______________________

Before : Hon Nguyen J in Court

Date of Hearing : 22 December 2004

Date of Judgment : 22 December 2004

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

1.I have considered the six grounds of appeal raised by the appellant and also the submissions made orally to me this morning.  I cannot say that these grounds lead me to the conclusion that the conviction is unsafe or unsatisfactory.  The magistrate was entitled to say that because of the discrepancy on the speed the appellant was driving at existing between his interview with the police and his evidence in court she drew the irresistible inference that the appellant was driving without due care and attention.

2.Appeal dismissed.

  (Peter Nguyen)
  Judge of the Court of First Instance,
  High Court

Ms Anna Lai, SGC, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent

Appellant in person