HKSAR v. IP CHI KEUNG

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1175 OF 1997

(On appeal from WSS 20172-3/97)

____________

____________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. The Appellant is a police constable attached to a traffic accident team. On 14th November last year, he was convicted after trial by D.J. Dufton, Esquire sitting in the Magistrate's Court at Western on one charge of careless driving and one charge of driving a private car when a passenger of two years or less was not securely fastened with a seat belt.

2. He now appeals against his convictions. He has written nothing in the space left in the pro-forma Notice of Appeal against Conviction for the insertion of his grounds of appeal. In court, he said that his only ground of appeal is that the magistrate has failed to consider the prosecution's failure to serve the Notice of Intended Prosecution on him within the 14 days as required under the law.

3. The magistrate has prepared a very detailed and careful Statement of Findings. He has in paragraph 14 of that Statement of Findings dealt specifically with the lateness of the Notice. It was only slightly late. The magistrate was entitled to take the view, which he did, that the Appellant was not prejudiced by such lateness.

4. I am fully satisfied of the propriety of the convictions; and this appeal is dismissed.