13 Sept 2019
HKSAR v. YIP KA-SHING
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 2280
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA383/2018
Section 52(3) RTO is properly construed to require proof of the defendant driver's subjective purpose to drive 'for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward' (a predominantly commercial purpose); no legal requirement of a direct contractual agreement between driver and passenger nor a distance-based remedial gloss; s52(3) is not overbroad or unconstitutional as properly construed; on the facts the drivers acted with the prohibited purpose and convictions are safe and upheld.