30 Mar 2012
LAU HOK TUNG AND OTHERS v. HKSAR
- Citation
- LAU HOK TUNG AND OTHERS v. HKSAR
- Court
- Court of Final Appeal
- Case number
- FACC7/2011
Section 26(4) of the Trade Descriptions Ordinance, as worded, reverses the burden by requiring the accused to prove on the balance of probabilities the absence of knowledge, reason to suspect and the ability to discover falsity by reasonable diligence; that reversal derogates from the constitutional presumption of innocence; but because the third limb (could not with reasonable diligence have ascertained) is an objective test materially different from the English defence, there is no compelling justification for a persuasive burden in Hong Kong; accordingly section 26(4) must be read down to…