Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Driving for hire or reward

Legal area

Court

14 Dec 1973

LEE HING CHEONG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LEE HING CHEONG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC866/1973

The magistrate's acceptance of the police officer's evidence, supported by the production of a marked note and the appellant's failure to credibly rebut or to show insurance coverage, was not vitiated by absence of the coins; appellate court will not overturn such factual findings and the fines and mandatory 12‑month disqualification were properly imposed, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
26 Mar 1973

LOK TAT SANG v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LOK TAT SANG v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC155/1973

Convictions for both offences are upheld and fines are appropriate; however, because the appellant holds a licence to drive mini-buses and the insurance certificate was defective only as to carriage for hire or reward, the court will limit the 12 month disqualification to private motor-cars to avoid depriving the appellant of his livelihood.
30 Nov 1972

CHENG LAP KAY v. THE QUEEN

Citation

CHENG LAP KAY v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC743/1972

The magistrate's acceptance of the police evidence provided ample basis for conviction; there was no basis to disturb the convictions or sentences on appeal. The sentence question on the scope of statutory disqualification under s.4(1) was adjourned pending determination of whether disqualification can be restricted to a class of vehicle, and the appellant must produce the insurance policy said to be in force on the date of the offence.
22 Sept 1972

LAU YIU SUM v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LAU YIU SUM v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC565/1972

Police identification that the appellant was driving 'a private car AJ 7121' together with the unchallenged description constituted sufficient prima facie proof that the appellant was the driver and that the vehicle was a private car; lack of a register extract did not vitiate the conviction.
19 Jul 1972

WONG KAM TAI v. THE QUEEN

Citation

WONG KAM TAI v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC484/1972

The magistrate's acceptance of the prosecution's corroborated evidence on the hire-for-reward incident, combined with the magistrate's finding that the appellant's insurance did not cover carriage for hire and the appellant's admitted previous conviction, justified conviction and the imposition of fines and a two-year disqualification; appellate court will not overturn credibility findings or sentencing discretion absent demonstrable error.
28 Sept 1971

MA KWAI PAK v. THE QUEEN

Citation

MA KWAI PAK v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC689/1970

The magistrate was entitled to accept the clear eyewitness evidence of police that money was handed from passenger to driver and to infer payment for carriage; there were no material conflicts justifying rejection of that evidence and no misdirection on the onus of proof, so the convictions must be upheld.
27 Apr 1971

LO KWONG-SUN v. THE QUEEN

Citation

LO KWONG-SUN v. THE QUEEN
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

CACC681/1970

The magistrate, having seen and heard the witnesses, accepted the police constable's evidence and found the offences proved beyond reasonable doubt; there was no basis for this Court to displace that credibility finding, so the appeal was dismissed and convictions upheld.

Hong Kong Case Law

LEE HING CHEONG v. THE QUEEN

LOK TAT SANG v. THE QUEEN

CHENG LAP KAY v. THE QUEEN

LAU YIU SUM v. THE QUEEN

WONG KAM TAI v. THE QUEEN

MA KWAI PAK v. THE QUEEN

LO KWONG-SUN v. THE QUEEN