Hong Kong Ordinances

CONSUMER GOODS SAFETY ORDINANCE - SECT 24

Defence of due diligence

(1) In any proceedings against a person for an offence under section 22 or a
regulation, it shall be a defence for that person to show that he took all
reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence to avoid committing the
offence.

(2) Where in any proceedings the defence provided by subsection (1) involves
an allegation that the commission of the offence was due-

   (a)  to the act or default of another person; or

   (b)  to reliance on information given by another, that person shall not,
        without the leave of the court, be entitled to rely on the defence
        unless, not less than 7 clear working days before the hearing of the
        proceedings, he has served a notice on the person bringing the
        proceedings giving such information identifying or assisting in the
        identification of the person who committed the act or default or gave
        the information as is in the possession of the person serving the
        notice at the time he serves it.

(3) A person shall not be entitled to rely on the defence provided by
subsection (1) by reason of his reliance on information supplied by another
person, unless he shows that it was reasonable in all the circumstances for
him to have relied on the information, having regard in particular-

   (a)  to the steps which he took, and those which might reasonably have been
        taken, for the purpose of verifying the information; and

   (b)  to whether he had any reason to disbelieve the information.

(4) A court, in making a decision on the defence provided under subsection
(1), may take into consideration the existence of a certificate from an
approved laboratory showing that the samples of consumer goods which are the
subject of the prosecution had been tested before being sold and had complied
with the safety standard or safety specification set out in the certificate.
(Enacted 1994)