Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether haemometers imported and described as blood cell separators could be treated as blood cell separators eligible for import under Open General Licence, and whether the confiscation and redemption fine were liable to be interfered with.
Analysis: The imported apparatus did not effect any separation of blood cells, no material was produced to show that the goods were known in trade as blood cell separators, and the supplier's literature also did not describe them as such. The goods fell within the life-saving equipment entry only if they answered the policy description, and the earlier clearance of similar goods did not furnish a legal basis to treat the present import as compliant. In the absence of evidence to justify the claimed description, the import was treated as a clear misdescription attracting confiscation. No material was placed to show that the redemption fine fixed was excessive.
Conclusion: The confiscation was upheld and the redemption fine was not reduced.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed in full and the departmental action against the import was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Goods imported under an import policy entry must answer the policy description on evidence, and a mere assertion or prior erroneous clearance cannot legalise a misdescribed import.