HKSAR v. Tam Lap Fai

HCMA 835/2003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 835 OF 2003

(ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 6681/2003)

____________

BETWEEN

____________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge E Toh in Court

Date of Hearing: 23 July 2004

Date of Ruling: 23 July 2004

__________

R U L I N G

__________

1.Normally, the rule for costs is -- although I have a discretion to award costs or not, the test is a successful appellant should normally be awarded his costs.  The occasion when costs is normally refused is when the court looks at the conduct of the appellant during the time of the investigation and whether he caused the prosecution authorities to consider that the case was stronger against him than it was. 

2.Without a doubt, according to the facts, the appellant did commit a road traffic offence and that he had exhibited on his own admission, certain behaviour of - to be put it mildly - disrespect and frustration to the police officers.  And it is -- I also note the fact that this appeal was brought as an appeal on all -- on the conviction on all four charges. 

3.And I was told only at the outset of this appeal that the appellant do not wish to appeal against his conviction in relation to Charge 1.  On considering the whole of the matter, I consider that this is not an appropriate case to grant costs and so the application is refused.  All right.  Thank you.

Miss Mary Sin, SADPP, of the Department of Justice, for Respondent

Mr Clive Grossman, SC, instructed by Messrs Lo & Lo, for the Appellant