Chan Yue-chor v. The Queen
Read the full judgment text of CACC 517/1976 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.
1. The appellant was convicted in a magistrates court on his plea of guilty of driving a vehicle, a public light bus, without a valid licence, driving a motor vehicle without Third Party insurance and picking up passengers in a prohibited area. He was fined $10 on the first count, $20 on the second count, $30 on the third count and was disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence to drive a public light bus for a period of 12 months. Against those penalties he now appeals.
|
CACC000517/1976
----------------- Coram: Trainor, J. Date of Judgment: 31st May, 1976. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. The appellant was convicted in a magistrates court on his plea of guilty of driving a vehicle, a public light bus, without a valid licence, driving a motor vehicle without Third Party insurance and picking up passengers in a prohibited area. He was fined $10 on the first count, $20 on the second count, $30 on the third count and was disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence to drive a public light bus for a period of 12 months. Against those penalties he now appeals. 2. Nothing whatever was advanced by the appellant that would in any way warrant a reduction of the penalties, and as to the disqualification, he advanced nothing to suggest circumstances special to the case that would warrant its removal. Indeed, having heard the appellant, I am satisfied that in the circumstances of this case he got off extremely lightly. In my opinion, driving a motor vehicle without Third Party insurance is one of the most serious offences that a motorist can commit. An act of negligence on his part may result in an unfortunate citizen being left a cripple for life or may leave a family without a bread winner. The chances of injured parties recovering appropriate damages from a driver such as the appellant would be, I should think, very remote indeed. 3. In my opinion the offence of driving a vehicle without Third Party insurance is one that demands a severe penalty. Indeed, I think imprisonment might well be considered the appropriate penalty for such an offence. I do not propose to impose a term of imprisonment in this case but I do think that the fine of $20 for such an offence is completely out of proportion to the offence committed and I allow the appeal against the penalty to the extent that I substitute a fine of $200 for that of $20 imposed.
Representation: Appellant in person. Hindle, c.c. for Respondent. |