13 Sept 2019
HKSAR v. YIP WAI-MING
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 2280
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA382/2018
Section 52(3) of Cap 374 requires proof of the defendant driver's subjective purpose to drive 'for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward' (a predominantly commercial purpose); an inter se agreement between driver and passenger is evidential but not an essential legal element; the provision as properly construed is not overbroad or unconstitutional and applies to platform-mediated services like Uber; on the facts the appellants had the requisite purpose and convictions and fines were upheld.