Interim protection for confiscated goods and stay of penalty recovery granted despite rejection of ownership claim

A claim to ownership over confiscated goods was treated as weak at the interim stage because title was asserted late and the surrounding circumstances did not support immediate protection, so the application for interim protection was rejected. However, because no notice had been issued to the claimant, Customs was directed not to sell or otherwise dispose of the goods during the appeal. On the penalty issue, the record did not show a prima facie entry by the consignee sufficient to attract immediate recovery, so recovery of the penalty was stayed and pre-deposit was waived.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant claiming to be the unpaid seller was entitled to interim protection against disposal of the confiscated goods pending appeal, and whether recovery of the penalty imposed on the consignee should be stayed.

Analysis: The claim to ownership over the parcel was found, at the interim stage, to be weak in view of the delayed assertion of title, the value and nature of the goods, and the surrounding circumstances. However, no notice had been issued to the applicant claiming the goods, so interim protection was considered necessary to preserve the subject matter of the appeal. As regards the consignee, the record showed no prima facie entry by him of the kind contemplated by the confiscation provisions, and the material was insufficient at that stage to sustain immediate penalty recovery.

Outcome: The application claiming interim protection over the goods was rejected, but the Customs authorities were directed not to sell or otherwise dispose of the goods during pendency of the appeal. Recovery of the penalty imposed on the consignee was stayed and deposit of the penalty was waived.

---