THE QUEEN v. ENTERPRISE LACASA & ASSOCIATES LTD. AND ANOTHER

THE QUEEN v. ENTERPRISE LACASA & ASSOCIATES LTD. AND ANOTHER

Section 24A applies where a false trade description is applied to imported goods whether the description was affixed before arrival or after import into Hong Kong; a prima facie presumption arises that goods imported from a country were manufactured there, and because the goods were imported from China and no evidence rebutted the presumption, the convictions were properly sustained.

Citation
THE QUEEN v. ENTERPRISE LACASA & ASSOCIATES LTD. AND ANOTHER
Parties
Respondent (crown): The Queen; Appellant (defendant): Enterprise Lacasa & Associates Limited; Appellant (defendant): Ho Sin Yee, Winnie
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
4 October 1991
Case Number
HCMA603/1991
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (magistracy) / Appellate Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld
Legal Topics
False Trade Description, Presumption as to Place of Manufacture, Construction of Section 24 a Trade Descriptions Ordinance, Evidence and Proof of Manufacture
Source Language
EN
Criminal Law Statutory Interpretation Trade Descriptions Law Customs and Import Regulation False Trade Description Presumption as to Place of Manufacture Construction of Section 24 a Trade Descriptions Ordinance Evidence and Proof of Manufacture

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Respondent (crown)

Enterprise Lacasa & Associates Limited

Appellant (defendant)

Ho Sin Yee, Winnie

Appellant (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (magistracy) / Appellate Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 24A of the Trade Descriptions Ordinance applies where a false trade description is affixed in Hong Kong after import
  2. 2 Whether, absent the s.24A presumption, the prosecution proved the place of manufacture of the goods

Ratio Decidendi

Section 24A applies where a false trade description is applied to imported goods whether the description was affixed before arrival or after import into Hong Kong; a prima facie presumption arises that goods imported from a country were manufactured there, and because the goods were imported from China and no evidence rebutted the presumption, the convictions were properly sustained.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Convictions affirmed