R. v. KO CHI HANG

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 549 OF 1994

________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

1. On 6th May 1994 at Western Magistrates' Court, the Appellant was convicted, after pleading not guilty, of careless driving. He was fined $500.00 and ordered to pay $200.00 costs. He now appeals against his conviction.

2. A police officer on a motorcycle, PW1, was following the Appellant's van in Queen's Road Central. The road had three lanes, and the Appellant was in the middle lane. According to PW1, the Appellant's van cut into the near-side lane in front of a public light bus, causing the bus to brake to avoid colliding with it. At the time, the van was only 3 feet in front of the bus, and the Appellant had not put his indicator on. The Appellant, in his evidence, admitted cutting into the near-side lane, but he claimed that he had switched his indicator on. He said he was more than 3 feet in front of the bus when he cut in front of it, and he denied that the bus had to brake to avoid colliding with him.

3. The magistrate accepted the evidence of PW1. He saw and heard PW1 and the Appellant, and he was in an infinitely better position to assess their reliability as witnesses than I. I cannot interfere with his finding. Could what the magistrate found the Appellant to have done amount to careless driving? I have no doubt that it could. It was, on the facts found by the magistrate, plainly open to the magistrate to conclude that the Appellant had departed from the standard to be expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case. The appeal must therefore be dismissed.