The High Court has established new sentencing benchmarks for individuals driving without a valid licence, distinguishing between those who have never held a licence and those who have had theirs revoked or disqualified.
The decision follows a case involving 46-year-old Garrick Eng Kwan Meng, who was caught driving in 2024 despite his licence having been revoked. While a district court originally handed Eng a $5,000 fine and a two-year driving ban in August 2025, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon allowed a prosecution appeal on April 22, sentencing him to four weeks’ jail instead.
Defining Culpability in Unlicensed Driving
In written grounds issued on May 26, Chief Justice Menon clarified the distinction between different types of unlicensed drivers. He noted that a driver who once held a licence but lost it completely is more culpable than an “unqualified driver” who has never held one.
“His disability to drive was the product of prior conduct serious enough to warrant the complete removal of his licence, and his decision to drive regardless reflects a persistent disregard for the safety of other road users,” the Chief Justice stated.
Under these new benchmarks, an unqualified driver—someone who has never held a licence—faces a starting sentence of two weeks’ jail and a two-year driving ban. In contrast, a qualified driver who loses their licence completely due to a court disqualification or police revocation faces a starting sentence of three weeks’ jail and a two-year driving ban.
Did You Know? Garrick Eng’s driving licence was originally revoked in June 2018 following a fatal accident that resulted in the death of his wife and injuries to one of his children.
Aggravating Factors in the Eng Case
While the starting benchmark for drivers in Eng’s category is three weeks’ jail, his sentence was increased to four weeks. The Chief Justice identified two aggravating factors: Eng had driven a significant distance with the intention of visiting multiple locations, and he was using a mobile phone while driving.
Eng was stopped by a police officer along Braddell Road on the afternoon of October 24, 2024, while driving a rented company van. He admitted to not having a licence and had also been charged with driving without insurance coverage.
Expert Insight: This ruling shifts the judicial focus from a driver’s technical competence to their underlying respect for public safety, treating the decision to drive while disqualified as a more serious breach of social responsibility.
Future Implications for Sentencing
The establishment of these two distinct benchmarks provides a clearer framework for the judiciary. Moving forward, the courts may have to re-assess the sentencing ranges for the offence of driving under disqualification in light of these newly laid down benchmarks.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between an unqualified driver and a qualified driver in this context?
An unqualified driver is a person who has never held a driving licence, whereas a qualified driver is someone who once held a licence but lost it completely through revocation or disqualification.
Why are drivers who lose their licences treated more severely than those who never had one?
The High Court determined that a driver who lost their licence did so due to prior serious conduct, meaning their decision to drive regardless reflects a persistent disregard for the safety of others.
What were the specific charges Eng pleaded guilty to?
Eng pleaded guilty to driving without a licence and driving without insurance coverage.
How should the legal system balance a driver’s technical ability against their history of safety violations?
