Customs House Agent duties end after lawful clearance and delivery absent knowledge of non-compliance or misuse of licence.

A Customs House Agent's reporting obligation under the licensing regulations arises only when non-compliance is known or apparent; once goods have been lawfully cleared and delivered as instructed, the agent's responsibility for that clearance ends. On the facts discussed, the Tribunal's finding that the goods were delivered according to the importer's instructions was supported by contemporaneous evidence and was not perverse. The later enquiry into the transport address did not displace that finding, and no material showed that the agent knew, or had reason to suspect, misuse of the advance licence. No continuing duty to inform Customs was therefore established, and revocation of the licence could not be sustained on those facts.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Tribunal's finding that the goods were delivered in accordance with the importer's instructions was perverse or unsupported by evidence. (ii) Whether a Customs House Agent had a continuing duty to inform Customs authorities after the goods had been cleared and handed over to the client, on the footing that there was non-compliance with the advance licence conditions.

Issue (i): Whether the Tribunal's finding that the goods were delivered in accordance with the importer's instructions was perverse or unsupported by evidence.

Analysis: The Tribunal's conclusion rested on the contemporaneous facts that the goods were cleared in 2001, delivered at the address directed by the importer, and handed over to the importer who was present at the time. The later enquiry in 2004 as to the existence of the transporter at that address did not undermine the factual finding. The material relied upon by Revenue did not establish that the respondent had knowledge that the address was non-existent or that the finding recorded by the Tribunal was arbitrary.

Conclusion: The finding was not perverse and called for no interference.

Issue (ii): Whether a Customs House Agent had a continuing duty to inform Customs authorities after the goods had been cleared and handed over to the client, on the footing that there was non-compliance with the advance licence conditions.

Analysis: Regulation 13(d) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations required the agent to advise the client to comply with the Act and to report non-compliance when such non-compliance was known or apparent. Once the goods had been cleared and delivered as instructed, the agent's responsibility in relation to the clearance came to an end. On the facts found, there was no reason for the respondent to suspect misuse of the advance licence or any breach requiring intimation to Customs.

Conclusion: No continuing duty to report arose, and no breach of the regulation was established.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on both questions of law and the revocation of the licence could not be sustained on the facts found by the Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: A Customs House Agent is not liable for non-compliance unless there is knowledge or a reasonable basis to suspect such non-compliance, and once goods are lawfully cleared and delivered as instructed, no continuing duty to investigate or report later misuse arises.

---