Lam Leung-ping v. The Queen

CACC000579/1977

Coram: Briggs, C.J.

Date of Judgment: 18th June, 1977.

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

JUDGMENT

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

1. The appellant was originally charged with the offence of criminal intimidation but the charge was amended to a charge of common assault. Why this was done is not stated on the record and I must confess that I can see no reason for such an amendment. The evidence showed that the appellant threatened one CHAN Kin-wing.

2. The two men were hawkers and there was a quarrel about the size and position of certain hawker stalls. There is no evidence other than evidence that threatening words were uttered by the appellant to Mr. Chan. There was no evidence that the appellant was armed with any weapon and there is no evidence that he made any gesture or touched Mr. Chan in any way. It is trite law that mere words cannot amount to assault. In my view, proof of the essential element of common assault. In my view, proof of the essential element of common assault was missing in this case and, therefore, the appeal must be allowed. There was, I may add, ample evidence of criminal intimidation but that charge, as I have said, was withdrawn.

3. The appeal therefore is allowed and the conviction set aside.

Representation:

A.A. Hoosen (H.H. Lau & Co.) for appellant.

Evans for Crown.