Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Dangerous driving causing death

Legal area

Court

11 Mar 2025

香港特別行政區訴魏永發

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 2236
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA408/2024

Viewing the CCTV and witness evidence de novo, the court concluded beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant failed to observe the rear area while reversing at an inappropriate steady speed despite limited rear-vision and known unreliability of the display; the trial judge permissibly rejected the expert reconstruction evidence for want of reliable foundation; the driving fell far below the standard of a competent careful driver and constituted dangerous driving causing death; the custodial sentence of 11 months (reduced from a 12‑month starting point) was within applicable guidelines and no…
12 Sept 2023

香港特別行政區訴廖家豪

Citation

[2023] HKCA 1052
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC56/2023

The trial judge's factual findings—based on expert and witness evidence—that the deceased was lying in a position a reasonable driver in the applicant's position ought to have seen, and that the applicant persistently failed to observe and take evasive action, supported convictions for dangerous driving causing death and related offences; there were no special reasons to reduce the mandatory 5-year disqualification under RTO s36(2); the applicant's out-of-time leave application lacked a reasonable basis and was dismissed.
31 Mar 2023

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. LAW SIU KIN

Citation

[2023] HKCA 352
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR6/2022

The court held the starting point of 2 years 9 months adopted by the sentencing judge was manifestly inadequate given the high level of intoxication (near three times limit), deliberate aggressive driving, ignoring warnings, failure to stop and delayed surrender; an appropriate starting point was 5 years, reduced by the full one-third guilty plea discount and a further 4 months adjustment for review, producing an effective sentence of 3 years' imprisonment on Charge 1; sentences for Charges 2 and 3 ordered to run concurrently because they were already taken into account as aggravating feature…
29 Dec 2021

香港特別行政區訴陳廸詩

Citation

[2021] HKCFI 3875
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMA174/2021

The trial judge properly weighed eyewitness, CCTV and expert reconstruction evidence and correctly concluded the appellant's continuous failure to observe the road and keep proper lookout amounted to dangerous driving causing death; the pedestrian's breach did not absolve the appellant and the sentence of 9 months' immediate imprisonment was within the appropriate range and properly mitigated.
31 Aug 2021

香港特別行政區訴林龍秋

Citation

[2021] HKCA 1201
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC221/2020

The court refused leave because the trial judge properly found that the applicant, knowing his passenger had just alighted, moved the heavy goods vehicle within about one second and turned left into the passenger's path; accident reconstruction evidence showed the passenger was observable; that conduct, in the circumstances, amounted to dangerous driving and there was no basis to overturn the conviction.
17 Mar 2021

HKSAR v. CHAN MAN TAT (陳敏達)

Citation

[2021] HKCFA 8
Court

Court of Final Appeal
Case number

FAMC43/2020

The trial judge validly excluded the defence expert for lack of appropriate expertise on the principal issue; the admitted physical and expert evidence overwhelmingly established the collision occurred in the motorcyclist's lane, so the Court of Appeal correctly applied the proviso and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
14 May 2020

香港特別行政區訴陳敏達

Citation

[2020] HKCA 305
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC344/2018

Although the trial judge erred procedurally in excluding the defence expert from giving evidence as an expert on traffic reconstruction/vehicle behaviour, that error was harmless in the circumstances: the defence failed to identify material additional evidence the expert would have given that could have undermined the prosecution case, the physical evidence and Dr To's analysis overwhelmingly supported the finding that the appellant had crossed the centre line, and therefore the conviction was safe and must be upheld.
17 Jan 2020

SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. CHENG TSZ HIN

Citation

[2020] HKCA 45
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CAAR2/2019

The Court refused the review because the judge correctly placed culpability within the least culpable dangerous driving band and selected a permissible starting point; the judge erred only in granting an extra 2 month discount for clear record (which was not warranted) and in granting 2 months for PTSD (reduced by this court to 1 month), but the combined errors did not make the sentence manifestly inadequate or such as to undermine public confidence and interference was not required given the offender's imminent release.
16 Oct 2019

香港特別行政區訴陳敏達

Citation

[2019] HKCA 1202
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC344/2018

Leave to appeal was granted because the trial judge failed to consider whether the proposed defence witness could give evidence on an alternative, narrower basis (as a vehicle-condition expert), and there were arguable grounds that exclusion of his evidence may have prejudiced the defence.
17 Jul 2019

HKSAR v. WONG KWOK WING

Citation

[2019] HKDC 957
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCC1154/2018

Costs application refused: because the defendant was convicted of the statutory lesser offence he was not acquitted of all offences after trial for the purposes of s.5 CCCO, and awarding costs for the acquitted dangerous driving charge would be unjust where the defence of both charges materially overlapped and no separate additional costs were incurred; the prior offer to plead did not entitle him to costs once he chose to defend at trial.