THE QUEEN v. ALAMO CO LTD

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 438 OF 1989

_________________________

BETWEEN

--------------------------

J U D G M E N T

--------------------------

1. The appellant company pleaded guilty to two charges of making a false statement in writing for the issue of a lience for the export of textiles to Amercia. The appellant appeals against a fine of $50,000 on each charge.

2. The application for a licence wrongfully stated compliance with four out of six conditions whereas the appellant had fulfilled only two. The appellant was not the manufacturer of the goods but the export agent for an American company. Had the payment for the goods been made by the appellant's principal the appellant would not have found itself in its present situation. This was not what is sometimes referred to in offences of this kind as a 'quota case'. The appellant stated that it only received a commission for its service. The appellant was incorpor-ated in 1981. The value of the goods in question was $786,300 and the appellant received a commission of $36,000 in the transactions.

3. The learned magistrate did not follow the often quoted Attorney General and Marvels Clothing Co. Ltd. (1987) HKLR 839 which would have resulted in fines totalling $314,520 which the learned magistrate thought would be far too out of proportion and he fined the appellant $50,000 on each charge. In coming to that figure he said he had regard to the fact that the appellant was an agent and not a principal.

4. I am unable to say that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The appeal is dismissed.