昨天講霧燈(昨天講錯了，違例並不扣分，現已更正)，今天講靠左駛。
很多人駕駛經驗充足，但很普通的交通條例也不認識，在快速公路怎樣使用行車綫是其中一個例子。現在所講的是超過一條行車綫(multi-lane)的道路，不少人習慣不用左綫，或者超越了在左綫行得較慢的車輛後，不駛回左綫行車，這樣做可能干犯兩條法例。新州交通條例第130(1)(a)條說明，在車速限制超過80公里的道路上，須靠左綫行駛，違例者最高可被罰20個罰款單位(penalty units)(each unit=$110)，若以定額罰款(fixed penalty)方式處理則為罰款$258並扣兩分。新州交通條例第130(1)(b)條說明，不依「除越過前車外 靠左駛」(Keep Left Unless Overtaking)的標誌，同樣是罰款$258並扣兩分。
當然法例上也列出容許不遵守靠左駛規則的情況*，譬如塞車、越過前車、有障礙物等。
香港相關的法例比較簡單，同樣使用「除越過前車外 靠左駛」(Keep Left Unless Overtaking)的標誌，違反這標誌最高可處罰款HK$5,000及監禁3個月(Sections 59, 60 Cap 374G)，以定額罰款處理則為HK$450，並不扣分。
下次在快速公路駕駛，請記住這法例。
*(2) The driver must not drive in the right lane unless:
(a) the driver is turning right, or making a U-turn from the centre of the road, and is giving a right change of direction signal, or
(b) the driver is overtaking, or
(c) a left lane must turn left sign or left traffic lane arrows apply to any other lane and the driver is not turning left, or
(d) the driver is required to drive in the right lane under rule 159, or
(e) the driver is avoiding an obstruction, or
(f) the traffic in each other lane is congested, or
(g) the traffic in every lane is congested, or
(h) the right lane is a special purpose lane in which the driver, under another provision of these Rules, is permitted to drive, or
(i) there are only 2 marked lanes and the left lane is a slow vehicle turn out lane.
(Road Rules 2008 Part 11 Divsion 2 Rule 130(2) New South Wales Legislation)
2011年5月31日星期二
2011年5月30日星期一
錯誤使用霧燈(Fog Light)
很多時晚間在路上都見到司機在行車時錯誤亮着霧燈，新州道路交通條例第214條(Road Rules 2008 Part 13 Division 1)對霧燈作出釋義*，而在218-1(a)條訂立使用的規範**，如果沒有霧，不是下大雨或下雪，也沒有沙塵暴，就不要亮着霧燈，否則可招致定額罰款86元，但不扣分。
香港對霧燈方面沒有特別管制，只有在釋義裏提及，主要是在有霧或有薄霧時才會使用的燈 (Section 2 Cap 374A)。
**The driver of a vehicle must not: (a) use any fog light fitted to the vehicle unless the driver is driving in fog, mist or under other atmospheric conditions that restrict visibility,
香港對霧燈方面沒有特別管制，只有在釋義裏提及，主要是在有霧或有薄霧時才會使用的燈 (Section 2 Cap 374A)。
*fog light means a light used to improve the illumination of the road in case of fog, snowfall, heavy rain or a dust storm.
2011年5月29日星期日
2011年5月28日星期六
麥健濤法官His Lordship Colin Mackintosh
我不敢為麥健濤法官寫悼念文章，我們沒有私交，只是共事了一段時間。去年11月回港與舊同袍吃飯，已知悉他的病況，月初傳來他的死訊，亦頗感錯愕。英年早逝，能不教人惋惜，天妒英才。大女兒看了他那篇A Note of Thanks也幾乎下淚。將要踏進鬼門關吃那孟婆茶，還倒頭來撫慰朋友不要忘掉他，切勿哀傷。那麼豁達，何其無奈。看了他這封信，我也滿眶露滋，不能自已。
麥健濤法官平易近人，有魅力也具領導才能，官聲甚佳。雖然在辯方的眼中他是「釘官」，卻從來都不罵人。我不能再寫了，自己鄙視那種借悼念他人而自我吹噓的文章，僅以幾句悼念詩作結。
傷逝
管它叫天國之路
管它叫地府陰曹
雖然不是甚麼偉人
卻是一個相識朋友
英年早逝
情何以堪
淚眼盈盈的愛人
泣不成聲的故友
忘不了
抹不掉
那音容笑貌
麥健濤法官平易近人，有魅力也具領導才能，官聲甚佳。雖然在辯方的眼中他是「釘官」，卻從來都不罵人。我不能再寫了，自己鄙視那種借悼念他人而自我吹噓的文章，僅以幾句悼念詩作結。
傷逝
管它叫天國之路
管它叫地府陰曹
雖然不是甚麼偉人
卻是一個相識朋友
英年早逝
情何以堪
淚眼盈盈的愛人
泣不成聲的故友
忘不了
抹不掉
那音容笑貌
那英姿神采
敢有歌吟
友儕同哀2011年5月27日星期五
Colin Mackintosh
I am not good enough to write a eulogy for Colin Mackintosh but I do remember him all the time. His early demise is a big loss to the Hong Kong Judiciary and a bigger loss to his good friends. I can only paste his letter here to remember him and to sigh for the fugacious life.
麥健濤法官臨終致謝信
A Note of Thanks
I hope that if there is any gathering here in Hong Kong following my demise, that it is in the form of a Thanksgiving rather than a memorial. We must all come to death in the end and it is Thanksgiving that matters most.
In my case it is a question of thanking you. Thanking you from deep in my heart for your contributions to my life, for making my life in Hong Kong the joy it has been. So if any of you have any tears, wipe them away.
I have been so privileged to have lived 20 years of my life in Hong Kong. I loved being a magistrate, surely the best job in the Judiciary; I loved the District Court. I was honoured and privileged to have been appointed to the Court of First Instance. I have been so lucky to have worked with so many wonderful people, magistates and judges, and support staff at every level. My clerks, my interpreters, my ushers, my office staff: you gave all contributed day in and day out to my happiness and I thank you for it.
I have made so many good and dear friends here in Hong Kong. Some of you in particular have been so special to me that I feel, as I write this note, that it will be a question of me losing you rather than you losing me. I have loved this place and I have loved you. You have truly enriched my life. You have, individually and collectively brought me fulfillment. What can be a greater tribute than to know that I am a better person for having known each and everyone of you. Please do not weep at my passing: just be thankful for my life.
All I ask you is that you do not forget me, at least, not too quickly. Remember me in your thoughts and prayers, tell stories about me sometimes and laugh about me; and I ask you to accept my thanks in good heart.
Of course I have some very special friends, including some from my old chambers in England and others whom I have met here, to whom I know that my departure will bring some great sadness; but do not despair, never despair. The miracle of life is a circle of birth and death: it always has been and always will be. What we have do is make the most of the time we are given; and I believe that Hong Kong enabled me to do that and I give thanks for it.
If I have offended any of you either in my judicial capacity or otherwise, then I ask for forgiveness. I am not perfect: I know that best of all. Let me tell you though, that upon reaching the pearly gates（天國之 門）, if I'm lucky enough to get there, I shall ask for a voir dire before any judgement is made in my life. I will maintain that I was never properly cautioned.
Please go from here in good heart and make the most of life. I do feel I have been snatched from it slightly early, well, earlier than I and my beloved wife Jani had planned. I feel that I had more to do, more to achieve in life; more to do as a judge, as a husband and father, and hopefully as a grandfather, but there we are. The Grim Reaper（死神） does not work to order.
I have known for many months that my condition would be a difficult one to beat; that the risks were substantial: a bit like, I can hear the wags(頑皮的人) say, a bit like the chances of an acquittal from Mackintosh in the District Court.
Thank you for coming today.
Thank you for all your support and prayers during my illness.
I love you.
麥健濤法官臨終致謝信
A Note of Thanks
I hope that if there is any gathering here in Hong Kong following my demise, that it is in the form of a Thanksgiving rather than a memorial. We must all come to death in the end and it is Thanksgiving that matters most.
In my case it is a question of thanking you. Thanking you from deep in my heart for your contributions to my life, for making my life in Hong Kong the joy it has been. So if any of you have any tears, wipe them away.
I have been so privileged to have lived 20 years of my life in Hong Kong. I loved being a magistrate, surely the best job in the Judiciary; I loved the District Court. I was honoured and privileged to have been appointed to the Court of First Instance. I have been so lucky to have worked with so many wonderful people, magistates and judges, and support staff at every level. My clerks, my interpreters, my ushers, my office staff: you gave all contributed day in and day out to my happiness and I thank you for it.
I have made so many good and dear friends here in Hong Kong. Some of you in particular have been so special to me that I feel, as I write this note, that it will be a question of me losing you rather than you losing me. I have loved this place and I have loved you. You have truly enriched my life. You have, individually and collectively brought me fulfillment. What can be a greater tribute than to know that I am a better person for having known each and everyone of you. Please do not weep at my passing: just be thankful for my life.
All I ask you is that you do not forget me, at least, not too quickly. Remember me in your thoughts and prayers, tell stories about me sometimes and laugh about me; and I ask you to accept my thanks in good heart.
Of course I have some very special friends, including some from my old chambers in England and others whom I have met here, to whom I know that my departure will bring some great sadness; but do not despair, never despair. The miracle of life is a circle of birth and death: it always has been and always will be. What we have do is make the most of the time we are given; and I believe that Hong Kong enabled me to do that and I give thanks for it.
If I have offended any of you either in my judicial capacity or otherwise, then I ask for forgiveness. I am not perfect: I know that best of all. Let me tell you though, that upon reaching the pearly gates（天國之 門）, if I'm lucky enough to get there, I shall ask for a voir dire before any judgement is made in my life. I will maintain that I was never properly cautioned.
Please go from here in good heart and make the most of life. I do feel I have been snatched from it slightly early, well, earlier than I and my beloved wife Jani had planned. I feel that I had more to do, more to achieve in life; more to do as a judge, as a husband and father, and hopefully as a grandfather, but there we are. The Grim Reaper（死神） does not work to order.
I have known for many months that my condition would be a difficult one to beat; that the risks were substantial: a bit like, I can hear the wags(頑皮的人) say, a bit like the chances of an acquittal from Mackintosh in the District Court.
Thank you for coming today.
Thank you for all your support and prayers during my illness.
I love you.
Remember me.
Goodbye
Colin
Colin
發落陳振聰之二
今天看報，可以看到更多關於陳振聰突然提堂的新聞，主控官高級助理刑事檢控專員唐立品(Turnbull)，是刑事檢控科分科四(商業罪案)第一組(嚴重詐騙案件)(Major Fraud)主管。除非把檢控陳振聰的工作外判，否則這件案會由唐立品一直處理下去。他否認突然檢控陳振聰與陳最近高姿態的言論有關，當然唐立品這講法完全不值得信，他沒可能承認這是真正原因，否則便變成打壓被告權利的口實。
控方表示案件會轉介高院審理，這是理所當然的事。明報報導
資深大律師湯家驊指出，由於本案涉及金額驚人，相信是控方將案件定於高院處理的主要原因。另一方面，由於刑事案的舉證標準較民事案高，故他認為本宗刑事案的結果將會對民事的爭產案有很大影響，民事案多會依賴刑事案的裁決為依歸，陳振聰一方大可將爭產案的最終上訴申請押後，至刑事案件審結後才作處理。
我不同意湯家驊的講法。下級法院的案件要求高級法院押後審訊來遷就或等待審訊結果，那是匪夷所思的想法，更何況那是終審法院的案件。假如真的這樣申請，陳振聰的刑事案由開始檢控至高院審結，及後可能的上訴，動輒是幾年後的事，沒有可能叫終院無限期押後(adjourn sine die)。無論如何，一定是終院優先。如果今年10月陳振聰在終院獲批上訴許可，到上訴正審會是明年中以後的事。
在刑事檢控方面，現在已啟動檢控程序，下一步是控方把案件轉介高院。所謂轉介，並非立即等高院排期，而是要在裁判法院，依據裁判官條例(Cap 227)所訂的步驟進行。首先案件要指定提訊日(appointment of return day), 然後辯方要決定是否同意有足夠表面證供(prima facie case)，如果不同意就先要進行初級偵訊 (preliminary enquiry)，由裁判官考慮是否把案件轉介高院，再由高院排期。以陳振聰這件案而言，他一定要求初級偵訊，一切順利起碼要一年才會在高院審理，況且他一定會以得不到公平審訊為理由，申請終止聆訊。在香港很難找到不唾罵他的人，要組成對他沒有偏見的陪審團，難比登天，他的情況比Nancy Kissel更差，申請終止聆訊的理據更強。
既然對陳振聰進行刑事檢控存在這麼多麻煩，控方為何沒有耐性多等幾個月，看一下終審法院會不會拒絕他上訴許可的申請才進行呢？所以我覺得突然檢控他，完全是由他最近的舉動，一手造成。然而，我同樣對控方突然檢控的回應，絕不讚同。控方對陳振聰最近的花招，無需要作出反應，只要沉着等待，已經足夠。不爭而爭，才是上策。
控方表示案件會轉介高院審理，這是理所當然的事。明報報導
資深大律師湯家驊指出，由於本案涉及金額驚人，相信是控方將案件定於高院處理的主要原因。另一方面，由於刑事案的舉證標準較民事案高，故他認為本宗刑事案的結果將會對民事的爭產案有很大影響，民事案多會依賴刑事案的裁決為依歸，陳振聰一方大可將爭產案的最終上訴申請押後，至刑事案件審結後才作處理。
我不同意湯家驊的講法。下級法院的案件要求高級法院押後審訊來遷就或等待審訊結果，那是匪夷所思的想法，更何況那是終審法院的案件。假如真的這樣申請，陳振聰的刑事案由開始檢控至高院審結，及後可能的上訴，動輒是幾年後的事，沒有可能叫終院無限期押後(adjourn sine die)。無論如何，一定是終院優先。如果今年10月陳振聰在終院獲批上訴許可，到上訴正審會是明年中以後的事。
在刑事檢控方面，現在已啟動檢控程序，下一步是控方把案件轉介高院。所謂轉介，並非立即等高院排期，而是要在裁判法院，依據裁判官條例(Cap 227)所訂的步驟進行。首先案件要指定提訊日(appointment of return day), 然後辯方要決定是否同意有足夠表面證供(prima facie case)，如果不同意就先要進行初級偵訊 (preliminary enquiry)，由裁判官考慮是否把案件轉介高院，再由高院排期。以陳振聰這件案而言，他一定要求初級偵訊，一切順利起碼要一年才會在高院審理，況且他一定會以得不到公平審訊為理由，申請終止聆訊。在香港很難找到不唾罵他的人，要組成對他沒有偏見的陪審團，難比登天，他的情況比Nancy Kissel更差，申請終止聆訊的理據更強。
既然對陳振聰進行刑事檢控存在這麼多麻煩，控方為何沒有耐性多等幾個月，看一下終審法院會不會拒絕他上訴許可的申請才進行呢？所以我覺得突然檢控他，完全是由他最近的舉動，一手造成。然而，我同樣對控方突然檢控的回應，絕不讚同。控方對陳振聰最近的花招，無需要作出反應，只要沉着等待，已經足夠。不爭而爭，才是上策。
2011年5月26日星期四
發落陳振聰
警方商業罪案調查科今天突然取消陳振聰的擔保，正式落案檢控他兩項控罪，分別是偽造(Forgery)及使用虛假文書(Using a False Instrument)，把他帶往東區法院應訊。案件押後至7月8日再提訊(for mention)，陳振聰准以4千萬現金及人事擔保，交出旅遊證件及每星期往山頂警署報到兩次。
從媒體的報導只有以上這些資料，讓我解釋一下突然落案提堂的理由，當然純屬個人猜測。首先，我不相信案件有任何突破性的發展，突然提堂很有可能是因為陳振聰近期時常高調出擊，既申冤又訴苦，把自己塑造成受不公平對待的人。律政司唯有對他正式提出檢控。控罪是根據刑事罪行條例(Crimes Ordinance Cap 200)第71條(偽造)及第73條(使用虛假文書)作出。偽造當然是指他偽造2006的遺囑，把該遺囑拿出來爭產便是使用虛假文書，每項控罪都可判監14年。
為何我猜測案件沒有突破性發展呢？陳振聰向終審法院提出上訴許可，排期在10月聆訊，在正常的策略下，刑事檢控會等待民事訴訟完畢後才展開，突然把陳振聰提堂是逼不得已的做法，都是給陳振聰近期的舉動逼成的。就算調查有突破性的發展，也無需急於一時，作無謂的舉措。把案件提了堂，也不過是押後6個星期再提訊，我不用在法庭，也能夠猜到是控方提出押後作進一步調查。到了7月8日，控方又會要求再押後至終審法院聆訊之後。故此，為何不讓他繼續保持現狀，幾個月到西區警署續保一次呢？近期陳振聰不斷申訴，寫信啦、見議員啦、接受東方日報訪問啦，總之嘩啦嘩啦，不斷喧嘩。為了成全他，於是正式落案，還反對他的擔保，使法庭訂下比他原本面對更嚴苛的擔保條件。這一回陳振聰賠了夫人又折兵，自取其辱。
終審法院的判決有時會出人意表，在正常的情況下，控方會等待終極判決才作進一步行動。這件案一直發展以來都沒有甚麼奇峰突出之處，控方證據並不特別強。反正陳振聰夾着尾巴也跑不了，無立即動手的必要。一切都是陳振聰自己佈局，自食其果。
從媒體的報導只有以上這些資料，讓我解釋一下突然落案提堂的理由，當然純屬個人猜測。首先，我不相信案件有任何突破性的發展，突然提堂很有可能是因為陳振聰近期時常高調出擊，既申冤又訴苦，把自己塑造成受不公平對待的人。律政司唯有對他正式提出檢控。控罪是根據刑事罪行條例(Crimes Ordinance Cap 200)第71條(偽造)及第73條(使用虛假文書)作出。偽造當然是指他偽造2006的遺囑，把該遺囑拿出來爭產便是使用虛假文書，每項控罪都可判監14年。
為何我猜測案件沒有突破性發展呢？陳振聰向終審法院提出上訴許可，排期在10月聆訊，在正常的策略下，刑事檢控會等待民事訴訟完畢後才展開，突然把陳振聰提堂是逼不得已的做法，都是給陳振聰近期的舉動逼成的。就算調查有突破性的發展，也無需急於一時，作無謂的舉措。把案件提了堂，也不過是押後6個星期再提訊，我不用在法庭，也能夠猜到是控方提出押後作進一步調查。到了7月8日，控方又會要求再押後至終審法院聆訊之後。故此，為何不讓他繼續保持現狀，幾個月到西區警署續保一次呢？近期陳振聰不斷申訴，寫信啦、見議員啦、接受東方日報訪問啦，總之嘩啦嘩啦，不斷喧嘩。為了成全他，於是正式落案，還反對他的擔保，使法庭訂下比他原本面對更嚴苛的擔保條件。這一回陳振聰賠了夫人又折兵，自取其辱。
終審法院的判決有時會出人意表，在正常的情況下，控方會等待終極判決才作進一步行動。這件案一直發展以來都沒有甚麼奇峰突出之處，控方證據並不特別強。反正陳振聰夾着尾巴也跑不了，無立即動手的必要。一切都是陳振聰自己佈局，自食其果。
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)