13 Sept 2019
HKSAR v. LEE HING-LUNG GARY
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 2280
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA390/2018
Section 52(3) RTO must be read to require proof of the defendant driver's subjective purpose to drive 'for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward' (mens rea); a direct contractual agreement between driver and passenger is not a legal requirement though it is relevant evidence; the provision is not overbroad or unconstitutional as properly construed; the magistrate's remedial interpretation imposing a distance-dependent reward requirement was rejected; on the facts the Appellants' convictions and fines were upheld and the appeals dismissed.