image_pdfimage_print

Author Archives: hksar gov

Travel agent convicted for applying false trade description to travel service

     A travel agent was convicted and fined $10,000 today (December 6) at Fanling Magistrates’ Court for having offered to supply travel service with a false trade description applied, in contravention of the Trade Descriptions Ordinance (TDO).

     Hong Kong Customs earlier received information alleging that a travel agent was suspected of engaging in unfair trade practices in the sale of travel services.

     After investigation, it was found that the claim by the travel agent in its leaflet that a one-day tour for sightseeing in the Mainland not departing from Hong Kong was covered by the Package Tour Accident Contingency Fund Scheme carried no truth.

     Customs reminds traders to comply with the requirements of the TDO and consumers to procure services at reputable shops.

     Under the TDO, any trader who applies a false trade description to a service supplied to a consumer commits an offence. The maximum penalty upon conviction is a fine of $500,000 and imprisonment for five years.

     Members of the public may report any suspected violations of the TDO to Customs’ 24-hour hotline 2545 6182 or its dedicated crime-reporting email account (crimereport@customs.gov.hk). read more

Murder in Aberdeen

     Police are investigating a murder case in Aberdeen this morning (December 6) in which a man died.      At about 8am, Police received a report that a person was found drowning at the sea off Wah … read more

Hong Kong Customs combats restaurants supplying short-weight seafood (with photo)

     Hong Kong Customs today (December 6) conducted a test-buy operation to combat restaurants supplying short-weight seafood and found a restaurant in Yau Ma Tei suspected of supplying short-weight Alaskan crab.

     During the operation, Customs officers ordered an Alaskan crab. A staff member of the restaurant weighed a crab with a spring balance and declared the crab had a weight of 80 taels.

     Upon examination, Customs officers found that the crab was short of weight by about 9.65 taels. The spring balance was also found to be inaccurate.

     Investigation is ongoing.

     Under the Weights and Measures Ordinance (WMO), any person who in the course of trade supplies goods to another person by weight or measure should supply the goods in net weight or net measure. Any shortage of the quantity purporting to be supplied is an offence. The maximum penalty upon conviction is a fine of $10,000. In addition, any person who uses for trade, or has in his possession for use for trade, any weighing or measuring equipment which is false or defective commits an offence. The maximum penalty upon conviction is a fine of $20,000.

     Customs reminds traders to comply with the requirements of the WMO. Consumers are also reminded to make purchases from reputable shops and pay attention to the process of weighing by restaurants when ordering food supplied in weight.

     Customs will continue to take stringent enforcement action against short-weight activities at restaurants to protect consumers’ interests and uphold a fair trading environment.

     Members of the public may report any suspected violations of the WMO to Customs’ 24-hour hotline 2545 6182 or its dedicated crime-reporting email account (crimereport@customs.gov.hk).

Photo  
read more

LRC invites public views on reform of access to information regime (with photo/video)

The following is issued on behalf of the Law Reform Commission:
      
     The Access to Information Sub-committee of the Law Reform Commission (LRC) is inviting  public views on whether reform of the current regime of public access to information held by the Government is needed, and if so, what kind of reform is preferred.
      
     Releasing the consultation paper in a press conference today (December 6), the Chairman of the Access to Information Sub-committee, Mr Russell Coleman, SC, said that the Sub-committee’s provisional views are that although the existing Code on Access to Information (the Code) is effective and cost-efficient, legislation should be introduced to implement an access to information regime with statutory backing. 
                            
     At present, access to government-held information is based on an administrative regime set out in the Code, which has been in operation since 1995. 
      
     In deciding the key features of the proposed access to information regime, the Sub-committee has studied the law and practice of relevant common law jurisdictions, and found that the public’s need to obtain more information about public bodies should be balanced with other types of rights including privacy and data-protection rights, and third-party rights.
                            
     “The proposed legislative regime would have exempt information categorised into absolute and qualified exemptions, like most common law jurisdictions,” said Mr Coleman.
      
     The Access to Information Sub-committee tentatively recommends to adopt as absolute exemptions the following categories of information:
 

  • Information accessible to applicants by other means
  • Court records
  • Legislative Council privilege
  • Information provided in confidence
  • Prohibitions on disclosure
  • Defence and security
  • Inter-governmental affairs
  • Nationality, immigration and consular matters
  • Law enforcement, legal and relevant proceedings
  • Legal professional privilege
  • Executive Council’s proceedings
  • Privacy of the individual
 
     As for qualified exemptions, a public body has to balance the public interest for and against disclosure. The Sub-committee tentatively recommends to adopt as qualified exemptions the following categories of information:
 
  • Damage to the environment
  • Management of the economy
  • Management and operation of the public service, and audit functions
  • Internal discussion and advice
  • Public employment and public appointments
  • Improper gain or improper advantage
  • Research, statistics and analysis
  • Business affairs
  • Premature requests
  • Conferring of honours
  • Health and safety
 
     It is also the Sub-committee’s tentative recommendation that the proposed regime should have certain review and appeal stages. The first stage is internal review of the decision by preferably another officer or officer of a higher rank. The second stage is review by the Office of the Ombudsman. If the applicant is not satisfied, he can proceed to the third stage of appeal to the Court.
      
     The recommendations include a proposed offence of altering or erasing records to prevent disclosure. “Where a request for information has been made to a public body, it should be an offence to alter, erase, destroy or conceal records with intent to prevent disclosure of records or information.  However, any failure on the part of a public body to comply with a duty should not confer any right of action in civil proceedings,” said Mr Coleman.
      
     Mr Coleman added that the provisional views expressed in the consultation paper are intended to facilitate discussion and do not necessarily represent the Sub-committee’s final conclusions. The Sub-committee would welcome views, comments and suggestions on any issues discussed in the consultation paper.
      
     All views should be submitted on or before March 5, 2019 to: The Secretary, Access to Information Sub-committee, LRC (4/F, Justice Place, East Wing, 18 Lower Albert Road, Central, Hong Kong) by mail, by fax (3918 4096) or by e-mail (hklrc@hkreform.gov.hk).
      
     The consultation paper and the executive summary can be accessed on the website of the LRC at www.hkreform.gov.hk. Hard copies are also available on request from the Secretariat of the LRC at the above address.
Photo  
read more