29 Nov 2019
HKSAR v. TSE KEE-BO
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 2899
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA392/2018
Court held that s52(3)(a) focuses on the driver's subjective purpose to provide carriage for hire or reward; actual payment is not required and no strict requirement of a direct contractual agreement between driver and passenger exists; the provision targets predominantly commercial carriage; BL Article 28 overbreadth and Article 33 freedom issues were not reasonably arguable on the facts and authority; application for certificate dismissed.