PP v Wong Yew Foo: Negligence, Drink Driving, and Fatal Road Accident

In Public Prosecutor v Wong Yew Foo, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by the Prosecution against the sentences imposed on Wong Yew Foo by the District Judge for one charge under Section 304A(b) of the Penal Code for causing death by a negligent act and one charge under Section 67(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act for drink driving. The charges arose from an incident on April 4, 2012, where Wong Yew Foo, while driving under the influence of alcohol, failed to keep a proper lookout and collided with a cyclist, Sin San Wah, who died as a result. The High Court allowed the Prosecution’s appeal, substituting the fines imposed by the District Judge with imprisonment terms for both charges and enhancing the disqualification period for the Penal Code offence.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Wong Yew Foo was sentenced for causing death by negligence and drink driving. The High Court allowed the Prosecution's appeal, imposing imprisonment.

1.7 Decision Date

9 July 2013

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Public Prosecutor	Appellant	Government Agency	Appeal Allowed	Won	Yvonne Poon of Deputy Public Prosecutors Mark Tay of Deputy Public Prosecutors
Wong Yew Foo	Respondent	Individual	Sentences Enhanced	Lost	Raj Singh Shergill of Lee Shergill LLP

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Chan Seng Onn	Judge	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Yvonne Poon	Deputy Public Prosecutors
Mark Tay	Deputy Public Prosecutors
Raj Singh Shergill	Lee Shergill LLP

4. Facts

The Respondent drove after consuming two bottles of beer.
The Respondent's breath alcohol level exceeded the prescribed limit.
The Respondent failed to keep a proper lookout while entering Jalan Bukit Merah.
The Respondent failed to stop at the give way line.
The Respondent's car collided with a cyclist, resulting in the cyclist's death.
The accident occurred at night with fair visibility and light traffic.
The cyclist was wearing dark clothing and his bicycle was poorly lit.

5. Formal Citations

Public Prosecutor v Wong Yew Foo, Magistrate's Appeal No 310 of 2012, [2013] SGHC 129

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2012-04-04	Respondent drove to Lorong 15 Geylang and consumed 2 bottles of beer
2012-04-04	Respondent drove along Lower Delta Road and entered a slip road leading to Jalan Bukit Merah
2012-04-04	Collision occurred between Respondent's car and the deceased's bicycle
2012-04-04	Deceased pronounced dead at the scene
2012-04-04	Respondent arrested and escorted to Traffic Police Headquarters
2012-04-04	Breath Evidential Analyser test conducted
2012-04-04	Accident occurred
2012-04-04	Respondent drove car
2012-04-04	Respondent consumed alcohol
2012-04-04	Respondent failed to keep proper lookout
2012-04-04	Death of Sin San Wah
2012-04-04	Breath test administered
2012-04-04	Respondent drove car
2012-04-04	Respondent consumed alcohol
2012-04-04	Respondent failed to keep proper lookout
2012-04-04	Death of Sin San Wah
2012-04-04	Breath test administered
2012-07-10	Decision Date

7. Legal Issues

Negligence
- Outcome: The court found that the Respondent's negligence was of such seriousness that the custodial threshold had been breached.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Failure to keep a proper lookout
  - Failure to give way
Drink Driving
- Outcome: The court found that the Respondent's drink driving was a serious aggravating factor warranting the imposition of a custodial sentence.
- Category: Substantive
Sentencing Principles
- Outcome: The court held that the DJ's imposition of fines for both the s 304A(b) PC and s 67(1)(b) RTA charges on the facts of this case were manifestly inadequate.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Aggravating factors
  - Mitigating factors
  - General deterrence

8. Remedies Sought

Increased sentence
Increased disqualification period

9. Cause of Actions

Causing death by negligent act
Drink driving

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Appeals
Traffic Violations
Personal Injury

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Angliss Singapore Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2006] 4 SLR(R) 653	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court has a limited scope to intervene when reappraising sentences imposed by a court at first instance.
Public Prosecutor v Mohammed Liton Mohammed Syeed Mallik	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2008] 1 SLR(R) 601	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court has a limited scope to intervene when reappraising sentences imposed by a court at first instance.
Public Prosecutor v Kwong Kok Hing	High Court	Yes	[2008] 2 SLR(R) 684	Singapore	Cited for the circumstances under which an appellate court would interfere with the sentence imposed.
Public Prosecutor v UI	High Court	Yes	[2008] 4 SLR(R) 500	Singapore	Cited for the threshold for determining whether a sentence is manifestly inadequate or excessive.
Public Prosecutor v Syamsul Hilal bin Ismail	High Court	Yes	[2012] 1 SLR 973	Singapore	Cited for the correct approach to determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed when the accused faces a number of separate charges.
Public Prosecutor v Gan Lim Soon	High Court	Yes	[1993] 2 SLR(R) 67	Singapore	Cited for the sentencing principle that the proper punishment for causing death by a negligent act is the imposition of a fine unless aggravating factors render it a “most unusual case” to warrant a custodial sentence.
Mohamad Iskandar bin Basri v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2006] 4 SLR(R) 440	Singapore	Cited for the sentencing principle that the proper punishment for causing death by a negligent act is the imposition of a fine unless aggravating factors render it a “most unusual case” to warrant a custodial sentence.
Public Prosecutor v Lee Kao Chong Sylvester	High Court	Yes	[2012] SGHC 96	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the sentence to be imposed will depend on the nature and extent of the culpability.
Public Prosecutor v Teo Poh Leng	High Court	Yes	[1991] 2 SLR(R) 541	Singapore	Cited for the approach to determine the seriousness of the Respondent’s negligence against the standard of care that a prudent and reasonable man would exercise.
Public Prosecutor v Lee Meng Soon	High Court	Yes	[2007] 4 SLR(R) 240	Singapore	Cited for the principal aggravating factors in drink driving cases: the level of alcohol and degree of control over the vehicle.
Lim Kay Han Irene v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2010] 3 SLR 240	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the sentence meted out to the offender must be calibrated according to the degree to which the offender was culpable for the offence.
Public Prosecutor v Law Aik Meng	High Court	Yes	[2007] 2 SLR(R) 814	Singapore	Cited for the principle of general deterrence.
Meeran bin Mydin v PP	High Court	Yes	[1998] 1 SLR(R) 522	Singapore	Cited for the principle of general deterrence.
Public Prosecutor v Tan Chean Wei	District Court	Yes	[2010] SGDC 240	Singapore	Cited as a case where the accused was charged under s 304A(b) PC and s 67(1)(a) RTA for driving under the influence of a drug.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 304A(b)	Singapore
Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, 2004 Rev Ed) s 67(1)(b)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Negligence
Drink driving
Causation
Aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
General deterrence
Disqualification
Breath alcohol level
Give way line
Proper lookout

15.2 Keywords

Traffic accident
Drink driving
Negligence
Fatal accident
Singapore
Criminal law

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Road Traffic Act	95
Criminal Law	90
Torts	30
Personal Injury	25

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Traffic Law
Negligence