30 Jul 2020
香港特別行政區 訴 林彥邦
- Citation
- [2020] HKCFI 1708
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA215/2019
The magistrate did not change the prosecution case; unchallenged objective evidence (dashcam/CCTV/witnesses) and expert opinion established a pattern of drowsy driving such that the appellant should have realised he was unfit yet continued to drive, which met the statutory test for dangerous driving under s.37; the same evidence and contemporaneous circumstances supported the conclusion that he knew of the collision and failed to stop; the magistrate lawfully admitted and weighed the post‑event statements.