Fey v Queen (Criminal Appeal No. 2059 of 1953)

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

Holding

A driver may be convicted of dangerous driving under section 17 of the Traffic Ordinance even when the conduct results from an error of judgment, provided the driver failed to exercise the degree of care and attention that a reasonably prudent driver would have exercised. Negligence need not be so great that it would amount to manslaughter if death had been caused. Driving with off-wheels over the centre line on the wrong side of the road when approaching an oncoming vehicle constitutes dangerous driving.

Outcome

Conviction for dangerous driving upheld; separate conviction for failing to keep to the left maintained but separate fine set aside

Facts

The appellant was convicted by a magistrate of driving a motor vehicle to the common danger contrary to section 17 of the Traffic Ordinance and of failing to keep to the left when approaching an oncoming car contrary to section 49(a). The magistrate found that the appellant's car, while being driven on the wrong side of the road, collided with an oncoming car driven by Mr. Gordon, which was well over on its correct side. The impact occurred on the appellant's wrong side of the road. The appellant saw the glow of headlights from the approaching car at some distance and was travelling faster than the oncoming vehicle. The appellant's off-wheels were across the centre line of the road at the time of collision.

Issues

1. Whether driving with off-wheels over the centre line constitutes driving on the wrong side of the road.
2. Whether negligence must be so great that if death were caused it would amount to manslaughter before a conviction for dangerous driving can be sustained.
3. Whether a driver can be convicted of dangerous driving when the conduct amounts to an error of judgment rather than recklessness.

Orders

• Appeal dismissed.
• Fine of Sh. 1,000 in respect of conviction under section 17 of Cap. 232 maintained.
• Separate fine imposed for conviction under section 49(a) of Cap. 232 set aside.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (2)

• Traffic Ordinance Cap. 232 s.17
• Traffic Ordinance Cap. 232 s.49(a)

Cases cited (2)

• Andrews v Director of Public Prosecutor [1937] AC 576
• Simpson v Peat [1952] 1 All ER 447

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.