13 Sept 2019
HKSAR v. KONG CHEUK-LAI
- Citation
- [2019] HKCFI 2280
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCMA402/2018
The court held that s52(3) RTO requires proof of the defendant driver's subjective purpose to carry passengers for hire or reward (a predominantly commercial purpose and expectation of reward derived from the carriage); no direct agreement between driver and passenger is an essential element (such agreement is evidence only); the provision is not overbroad or unconstitutional as properly construed; on the facts the appellants were properly convicted and the appeals were dismissed.