Speeding in Taiwan: Man's "Emergency" Plea Rejected in Court

A driver in Pingtung, Taiwan, was fined for excessive speeding, but his claim of rushing his wife to the hospital was dismissed due to lack of evidence.

In Taiwan, a man named 涂 (Tu) faced a fine of NT$12,000 and mandatory road safety courses after being caught speeding over 50 kilometers per hour on the Taí24 line in Changzhi Township, Pingtung County. The incident occurred while he was driving his car eastbound at the 10-kilometer mark.

The driver contested the fine, claiming he was rushing his wife to the hospital after she had been hit by a car and was not paying attention to his speed. He argued he only realized he had been speeding after receiving the ticket. The court, however, examined his wife's medical records and found no connection between the incident and the speeding violation. The court dismissed the appeal, with the possibility of further appeal.

The court's decision, issued on January 11, 2024, detailed that 涂 (Tu)'s vehicle had exceeded the speed limit by more than 50 km/h. The radar device used to measure the speed had been duly certified and was in its valid operational period. The Pingtung Motor Vehicle Office had processed the case on February 20, 2024, issuing the fine and the requirement to attend a road safety course.

The court's ruling stated that 涂 (Tu)'s wife had been in a car accident on December 19, 2023, requiring post-operative care for three months. Furthermore, her follow-up appointment on January 11, 2024, had concluded by 11:06 AM, prior to the speeding incident at 12:54 PM. Therefore, the court determined there was no demonstrable connection between his wife's medical needs and the speeding violation.

The court emphasized that speeding reduces a driver's field of vision, increasing the risk of accidents and the severity of potential injuries. It also clarified that the "emergency" defense, according to Article 13 of the Administrative Penalty Law, must involve an immediate threat to life, body, liberty, reputation, or property, and that the action taken must be unavoidable to avoid such a threat. The court, therefore, rejected 涂 (Tu)'s claim, ruling it lacked sufficient justification to overturn the penalty.