HKSAR v. KILA MATALA MUTAKWE CHRISTIAN

HCMA1096/2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1096 OF 2007

______________________

______________________

______________________

J U D G M E N T

______________________

1.  In this case, the appellant was convicted on his own plea of guilty to three summonses on 18 October this  year.  Those three summonses were driving a motorcycle, the registration mark displayed at the back of which did not conform with the Fourth Schedule of the Road Traffic Registration and Licensing of Vehicles Regulations, Cap.374E, without reasonable excuse, contrary to Regulations 8, 2 and 61 of Cap.374E of the laws of Hong Kong; secondly, driving a motorcycle on a road whilst not being the holder of a driving licence in respect of the vehicle of the class of vehicle being driven, contrary to sections 42(1) and (4) of the Road Traffic Ordinance, Cap.374 law of Hong Kong; and thirdly, using a motorcycle on the road where there was not in force in relation to the user of the vehicle by the appellant a policy of insurance or such a security in respect of third party risks as complied with the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party) Risks Ordinance, Cap.272, contrary to sections 4(1) and (2) of the Cap.272, the Third Party Insurance Offence.

2.  The appellant was fined $400, $700 and $1200 respectively in relation to the summonses, and in respect of the summons for using a motor vehicle on a road when there was no third party insurance, he was disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence for all classes of vehicles for 12 months.

3.  It is this disqualification order that the appellant now appeals against.

4.  The appellant in support of his appeal against the disqualification order has produced an insurance cover note from the Bank of China Group Insurance Co. Ltd, purporting to show that the appellant was covered at the relevant period.  However, in response to this, the prosecution have produced a letter from the Bank of China Group Insurance Co. Ltd dated 6 September of this year indicating that the appellant at the material time, that is 20 April of  this year, was not covered as he was not in possession of a valid driving licence.  That in fact is the case and, indeed, the appellant also pleaded guilty to a summons to that effect. 

5.  In this regard, I do not accept what the appellant has told me this morning - to the effect that he pleaded guilty to make the matter more simple.  The fact of the matter is that his driving licence was cancelled on 21 March of this year as a result of his previous appeals in HCMA111 and HCMA61 being dismissed by Madam Beeson J on the same date.

6.  The learned magistrate in her reasons for sentence noted that if a person contravenes section 4(1) of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance, Cap.272, section 2(a) provides for mandatory disqualification for 12 months unless there are special reasons.

7.  The magistrate considered very carefully the mitigation put before her by the appellant and said this, and I quote, “Having considered the mitigating factors advanced by the appellant, I am not satisfied that those advanced by the appellant were sufficiently special to justify departure from the operation of the mandatory period of disqualification.”

8.  I completely agree with the learned magistrate’s reasons and accordingly this appeal is dismissed.