Re Judicial Review By Hermes Pacific Limited

Case No.

Court

Date—

Judge—

Case Document

100%Judiciary

HCMP001936M/1987

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

HIGH COURT

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 1936 OF 1987

__________

IN THE MATTER of an Application for leave to apply for Judicial Review by Hermes Pacific Limited

and

IN THE MATTER of the determination or classification dated 13th Janaury 1987 and 8th May 1987 of the Commissioner of Customs and Excise

__________

Coram: Hon. Barnett J. in Court

Date of hearing: 14th October 1987

Date of decision: 21st October 1987

___________

ADDENDUM

___________

To be inserted on p. 9 of the decision after "purpose is cleanliness."

As to paragraph (d), it is correct that a "fragrance" is a sweet smell. It is equally correct, as Mr Feenstra pointed out, that section 76 is concerned not with a fragrance simpliciter but with a preparation which is or purports to be a fragrance. It is clear, in my view, that this is intended to mean a substance whose purpose or attribute is, or is to impart, a sweet smell. To determine whether a soap or other excepted preparation is or purports to be a fragrance it is proper to ascertain whether the preparation's emphasis is on imparting a sweet smell rather then on simple cleanliness.

	(N.J. Barnett)
	Judge of the High Court

Representation:

Mr. M. Merry inst'd by M/S Denton Hall Burgin & Warrens for the Applicant.

Mr. P.F. Feenstra of Legal Department for the Crown Solicitor.