HKSAR v. TSE WAI TUNG

HCMA 922/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 922 OF 2000

(ON APPEAL FROM TMCC 2433/2000)

_______________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. This Appellant was convicted in the Magistracy of Driving an Unlicensed Vehicle and Using a Vehicle without Third Party Insurance. The same vehicle was involved in each charge.

2. He pleaded guilty to both charges. He was fined $3,000.00 on each charge and in respect of the 2nd charge was disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence for all classes of vehicles for a period of 12 months. He appeals against both sentences. He submitted that the fine of $3,000.00 in respect of the 1st charge was too heavy and that in respect of the disqualification period he should not be disqualified.

3. On 14 June 2000 the police stopped the Appellant who appeared to be driving in a manner they regarded as suspicious. There was no vehicle licence on the window of the car. A check of the records showed that the vehicle licence expired in August 1999, and that the insurance policy had expired on 30 March 2000. The Appellant told the police that he knew he did not have a vehicle licence and that he did not have third party insurance. Those were the facts he admitted before the Magistrate.

4. The Appellant advised the Court that he had actually paid the insurance agent, but the agent had never given the premium money to the insurance company and therefore the fact he was not insurred was beyond his control. He said that he worked in a garage and could only repair the car at night; because he repaired the brake he had to test the vehicle on the road. He said the disqualification meant he was almost unemployable.

5. The Magistrate, in sentencing, took into account that the maximum financial penalty for the first charge was HK$5,000.00 and for the 2nd charge was HK$10,000.00. He took into account the Appellant's pleas of guilty in imposing the penalties of HK$3,000.00 on each charge, noting that the vehicle licence had expired for a substantially longer period than the vehicle insurance had.

6. He was aware in respect of the 2nd charge, that of driving without 3rd party insurance, that there was an obligatory disqualification period of at least 12 months in the absence of special reasons. The Magistrate did not find any special reasons existed in this case and disqualified the Appellant for the minimum of 12 months.

7. Having considered the facts and the Magistrate's Statement of Findings, I am satisfied that the Magistrate was correct in sentencing as he did. Both of these were serious offences, the second particularly so in view of the danger that the Appellant posed to third parties when driving.

8. This appeal against sentence is dismissed.