HKSAR v. Chan Ka Chun

Read the full judgment text of DCCC 440/2009 on BabelCite. This District Court judgment was delivered on 5 October 2009.

1. The defendant, Chan Ka-chun, was convicted after trial of careless driving; i.e., 1st charge. Originally the defendant faced a charge of causing death by dangerous driving for which I found the defendant not guilty and convicted him instead of careless driving.

Cited by 1 case

Case No.DCCC 440/2009
Court
District Court
Date05 Oct 2009
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

DCCC440/2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 440 OF 2009

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

  HKSAR  
  v.  
  Chan Ka-chun  

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

Before:

Deputy District Judge Johnny Chan

Date:

5 October 2009 at 9.46 am

Present:

Mr Nigel Bedford, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
Mr Thomas Iu leading Mr Chan Wai-ming, instructed by Messrs Li, Wong, Lam & W I Cheung, for the defendant

Offence:

(1) Causing death by dangerous driving (危險駕駛引致他人死亡)
(2) to (3) Using a defective vehicle (使用欠妥的車輛)

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.The defendant, Chan Ka-chun, was convicted after trial of careless driving; i.e., 1st charge. Originally the defendant faced a charge of causing death by dangerous driving for which I found the defendant not guilty and convicted him instead of careless driving.

2.The defendant also pleaded guilty to the 2nd and the 3rd charges in this case; i.e., using a defective vehicle. It is common ground that the defect in question had nothing to do with the traffic accident which led to the death of the deceased in this case.

3.Before sentence I called for a Community Service Order Report. For the reasons stated in the report the probation officer suggest that the defendant be sentenced to a community service order for a long duration of 240 hours.

4.I do not propose to recite the findings of fact. I have stated the same in my reasons for verdict.

5.The evidence in this case shows that the defendant was speeding at the time. There is also some evidence that the defendant had consumed alcohol before the accident in question though the defendant was able to pass the screening breath test. His alcohol level was 21 ug per 100 ml which was just within the permissible level of 22 ug per 100 ml for driving the vehicle.

6.I have considered the mitigation conducted by Mr Iu for the defendant. Of all the sentencing options I have come to the view that a community service order is the most suitable option which can bring home the seriousness of the matter to the defendant. A CSO of a duration of 120 hours would be sufficient to reflect the seriousness of this case. In addition, I think it is appropriate to order the defendant to attend a driving improvement course. For Charges 2 and 3 a financial penalty is appropriate.

7.For the reasons given for Charge 1 I sentence the defendant to a community service order for the duration of 120 hours. In addition I order the defendant to attend and complete a driving improvement course.

8.Charge 2, I impose a fine of $2,000. Charge 3, likewise, I impose a fine of $2,000. The fines shall come from the bail of the defendant.

  (Johnny Chan)
Deputy District Judge

Cited by 1 case

Other judgments that cite this case