Yip Oi Sang v. The Queen
|
CACC000916/1974 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 916 OF 1974. -----------------
----------------- Coram: Huggins, McMullin & Pickering, JJ. Date of Judgment: 6th December 1974. ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- Huggins, J.: 1. The case originally came before a single judge in the usual way but Briggs, C.J. referred it to this Court. 2. The Appellant was charged on three charges - driving a private car for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward, driving a motor vehicle without third party insurance and driving while disqualified. This is an appeal against sentence and the only part of the sentence which has been attacked is an order for disqualification from driving all vehicles for a period of three years. It is sufficient to say about the first two charges that there were substantial fines imposed with periods of imprisonment in default and about the third charge that there was a period of one month's imprisonment. We would remark that the learned magistrate ordered that the periods in default of the fines should be concurrent with the substantive term on the third charge. We do not intend to alter that, but we would point out that it was wrong: it has been said before that to make a term of imprisonment in default of payment of a fine concurrent with a substantive term of imprisonment is an invitation not to pay the fine. 3. The Appellant was previously disqualified from driving only private cars, as we understand it, but it was a private car which he was driving when he was caught during the period of disqualification. The learned magistrate thought that the disobedience to the order of disqualification was so grave that he ought not only to impose a term of imprisonment (which is in accordance with decisions of the courts) but ...(illegible) a long term of total disqualification was required. We are new asked to limit the disqualification to private cars to enable the Appellant to earn his living as a driver of other vehicles. We have before us, which was not before the learned magistrate, a letter from a charitable organization which urges that the Appellant's wife is dangerously ill and that he committed the present offences in order to obtain money for her medical care. We also take into account the general proposition that in most cases it is undesirable to prevent someone who has been a driver by profession from exercising his profession for a long period as that is likely to lead to the commission of other offences. 4. In all the circumstances of this case we think it is proper to allow the appeal and to limit the period of disqualification to the class of private cars. 6th December 1974. Representation: |