HKSAR v. LI SUN HA

HCMA842/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.842 OF 2002

(ON APPEAL FROM KTS900489 OF 2002)

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

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. The appellant Li Sun Ha was convicted of careless driving by a deputy magistrate of Kwun Tong Magistracy on 1 August 2002 and she now appeals against her conviction. The appellant was represented at her trial but has appeared unrepresented before me today.

2. The allegation was straightforward, in brief that the appellant was driving a KMB bus in the 2nd lane of Po Kong Village Road and moved over into an adjacent lane, hitting a taxi as she did so. The prosecution called the taxi driver, a passenger and the police officer who investigated the accident. The appellant elected not to give evidence and called no witnesses.

3. The magistrate in her careful Statement of Findings demonstrated that she had a clear grasp of the facts and of the issues. She did not misunderstand the defence submissions made on the day as the appellant has today suggested. There were discrepancies in the prosecution evidence and the magistrate recognised this and dealt with them. She has also in her Statement of Findings dealt with the points raised by the defence at the trial. As she points out she had the benefit of observing the demeanor of the witnesses at the trial and found them to the honest and reliable.

4. The appellant has today repeated much of what her solicitor said at the trial but has raised nothing which causes me to question the findings of the magistrate. The real issue was not as the appellant has said today whether or not she overtook the taxi but whether she, in her bus changed lanes carelessly.

5. Today's hearing is not being a re-trial of the issues. The real issue in this matter was one of credibility of the witnesses who testified during the trial. The magistrate had the opportunity of seeing and hearing the witnesses as I have not. She was the person in the best place to assess the testimony. She evaluated their evidence as she was required to do. She demonstrated in her Statement of Findings that she had reminded herself of all the directions necessary in this matter.

6. The appeal of Madam Li is dismissed.