- 3
If the Court does disqualify a
person they are not liable to receive the penalty points attributable to that offence. In addition any previously accrued points are extinguished. If the Court does not disqualify then penalty points will accrue in the usual way, as they would if the fixed penalty procedure
was adopted. In these cases the two systems can co-exist without difficulty.
Thirdly, speeding offences under section 41 of the Road Traffic Ordinance. The difference between speeding offences and those I have just referred to in the Road Traffic Ordinance is that section 41(2) gives a specific direction to the Court on disqualification. If a case which comes
before the Court on information involves
a third or subsequent offence the Court must impose a disqualification of 12 months. The possibility of disqualification under the Road Traffic (Driving-Offence Points)
Ordinance arises on the accumulation of 15
points. A conviction under section 41 of the Road Traffic Ordinance attracts 3 points. Five speeding convictions are therefore necessary before a person becomes liable to disqualification. It is this third category of offences which might cause confusion.
It is not considered necessary to provide
by law as to when a particular procedure will be adopted, as possible confusion might only arise as regards disqualification as a result of speeding offences. An inter-departmental working group has examined the anomaly, and I intend to recommend to Transport Advisory Committee and Executive Council the removal of the mandatory disqualification provision under section 41(2) of the Road Traffic Ordinance.
/The