Western Harbour Tunnel Co Ltd v. Hung Kin Ming

Read the full judgment text of HCMA 814/2004 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 16 September 2004.

1. The appellant was convicted after trial of “speeding”, contrary to Sections 7 and 28 of the Western Harbour Crossing Bylaw, made under the Western Harbour Crossing Ordinance, Cap. 436.  He was fined $1,200 and disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence for a period of 6 months.   The appellant now appeals against the disqualification order.

Cites 1 case

Case No.HCMA 814/2004
Court
High Court CFI
Date16 Sep 2004
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

[English Translation]

HCMA 814/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 814 OF 2004

(On appeal from KTCC 7375 of 2004)

____________

BETWEEN

  WESTERN HARBOUR TUNNEL CO. LTD.  Respondent
  and  
  HUNG KIN MING Appellant

____________

Coram: Deputy High Court Judge Pang in Court

Date of Hearing: 16 September 2004

Date of Judgment: 16 September 2004

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

JUDGMENT

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

1.The appellant was convicted after trial of “speeding”, contrary to Sections 7 and 28 of the Western Harbour Crossing Bylaw, made under the Western Harbour Crossing Ordinance, Cap. 436.  He was fined $1,200 and disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence for a period of 6 months.   The appellant now appeals against the disqualification order. 

2.The appellant’s contention is simply that, in the recent case of HKSAR v. Lau Yin Chun Lucilla, HCMA 444/2004, it was held that, apart from imposing a fine, neither the Western Harbour Crossing Ordinance nor its Bylaw have empowered magistrates to disqualify an offending driver from holding or obtaining a driving licence.  Moreover, the power conferred by Section 69(1) of the Road Traffic Ordinance, Cap. 374 upon magistrates is not exercisable in this type of cases.  see the reasons for the decisions are set out in the judgment of Lau Yin Chun Lucilla and it is not necessary for me to repeat them here.

3.It has to be pointed out that, in his written judgment, the magistrate has already indicated his acceptance of the appellant’s contention.  Neither has the representative of Western Harbour Crossing Co. Ltd. taken issue with that contention.  I also concur with the judgment of the relevant case which I have had the benefit of reading.

4.I now allow the appeal and set aside the order of disqualification from holding or obtaining a driving licence for 6 months.  The fine is not disturbed.

  (Derek Pang)
Deputy Judge of the High Court

Mr. Tse Kai Bor of Pang, Wan and Choi, for the Appellant

Mr. Philip Tang of Hampton, Winter and Glynn, for the Respondent

Translated by the Judgment Translation Unit of the Judiciary and approved by Mr. Edmund Cham, Solicitor

Other Judgments in This Case

Further hearings and rulings under HCMA 814/2004