19 Jun 1975
ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LAM MOK
- Citation
- ATTORNEY GENERAL v. LAM MOK
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Case number
- CACC301/1975
When both equipment and commodity have been seized under s.86(1) and the accused is convicted of a designated hawker offence, s.86A(1)'s mandatory direction to the court requires forfeiture of all items seized; the word 'or' in the subsection does not afford the court a discretion to forfeit only one category where both were seized, and the magistrate's contrary approach was erroneous.