13 Sept 2019
HKSAR v. TSE KEE-BO
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 2280
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA392/2018
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 mens rea element). No direct agreement between driver and passenger is a legal prerequisite; such agreement is evidence but not essential. The provision is not overbroad or unconstitutional as so construed and is capable of applying to app-based intermediary arrangements like Uber. On the facts the court found the appellants acted with a predominantly commercial purpose and expected reward derived from the trips, so convictions a…