THE QUEEN v. NG CHUNG-SANG

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

Magistracy Criminal Appeal No. 682 of 1985

________

BETWEEN

___________

JUDGMENT

___________

1. This is an appeal against the conviction of fighting in a public place. The charge alleges that the appellant fought "at Canton Road, near Austin Road", on the 25th May 1985.

2. The main ground of the appeal is that there was no evidence that the place where the fight admittedly took place was a public place as defined in the Public Order Ordinance, Cap. 245. That definition reads as follows :

"Public place means any place to which for the time being the public or any section of the public are entitled or permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise, and in relation to any meeting includes any place which is or will be on the occasion and for the purposes of such meeting a public place."

3. The evidence in this case was that a fracas took place on a construction site off Canton Road. The appellant was the driver of a truck and there was evidence that a dispute arose because he had refused to move the truck. It is quite clear, however, and Crown Counsel properly concedes that there was no evidence that the construction site was a public place as defined. That being so the conviction cannot stand and must be quashed. The fine of $500, if paid, is to be remitted.