HKSAR v. Chan Yuet Ngor
|
HCMA992/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Appellate Jurisdiction) MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.992 OF 2006 (ON APPEAL FROM KCV 97 OF 2006) --------------------- BETWEEN
---------------------- Before : Deputy High Court Judge M. Poon in Court Date of Hearing : 16 November 2006 Date of Judgment : 16 November 2006 ------------------------ J U D G M E N T ------------------------ 1.The appellant was convicted after trial of one count of failing, without reasonable excuse, to comply with the requirement indicated by a directional arrow road marking of the type shown in Figure No. 509 of the Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulations, Cap.374. She was fined a total of $1,400. She now appeals against her conviction. 2.The appellant’s taxi was seen travelling on the 3rd lane of Cha Kwo Ling Road and made a U-turn at the unnamed road into west bound. The road marking on that lane was a straight arrow, vehicles could only travel straight ahead and could not take any short cut to negotiate a U-turn at the unnamed road. The appellant was stopped by a police officer and she explained that she tried her luck as the road had been closed and she was in a hurry to refuel. Vehicles that could originally turn right directly into the petrol station in Wai Lok Street need to travel further down to Yau Tong Road before they could make a U-turn. 3.The appellant did gave evidence. She admitted to have made a U-turn at the junction of Cha Kwo Ling Road and the unnamed road. She claimed she saw no road signs prohibiting U-turn. She also said that she failed to notice any road markings on the road surface until she was told about such by PW1. Grounds of appeal 4.The appellant submitted that due to unexpected circumstances of closure of the road leading to Wai Lok Street she had a reasonable excuse not to obey road markings by making a U-turn at the junction with the unnamed road. Respondent’s reply 5.Counsel for the respondent submitted that the only issue was whether the appellant had any reasonable excuse in making the U-turn as she did. It is submitted that under the circumstances of the closure of the road leading to Wai Lok Street, the appellant was not precluded from turning into Wai Lok Street altogether as there was another alternative, by complying with the road markings, by travelling further down the road to make a U-turn at Yau Tong Road. Counsel submitted that the magistrate was correct in finding that failure to notice road markings on the road surface did not amount to any reasonable excuse. My judgment 6.This is a simple and straightforward case. It was not disputed that the appellant did make a U-turn at the said junction where there was clear road markings on the road surface with a straight-on directional arrow. It is clear from PW1’s evidence that vehicles could not make U-turns even if there were no road markings prohibiting U-turn but the road surface had a straight directional arrow. The magistrate correctly found the failure on the part of the appellant either to notice the road markings on the road surface, or that she had checked but could not find any road sign prohibiting U-turn did not constitute reasonable excuse for failing to comply with the requirement of the directional arrow. The submission of the appellant today is without any basis and totally unsupported by any evidence. Sheer inconvenience or unfamiliarity with road conditions or circumstances is not a reasonable excuse. It is indeed perplexing to find that a part-time professional driver holds such a misconceived belief or view. 7.The magistrate was correct in coming to her findings. This appeal is dismissed.
Mr Raymond Cheng, Acting SGC of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent Appellant, in person |