Magistrate refused a forfeiture application by Customs and Excise (C&E) of goods worth HK$ 1.76 million.

The C&E seized some cigars at the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, which were declared on the manifest as “KITCHEN CERAMIN ORNAMENTS USED AND LEFT BEHIND”. C&E applied to the magistrates’ courts for their forfeiture pursuant to s. 28 of the Import and Export Ordinance (Cap 60) on the ground that they are unmanifested cargo. By correspondence, the courier company in the UK admitted that the wrong declaration was their fault and the cigars had been accurately described on the shipping order. The cigars had intended all along to be sent to Macau (rather than Hong Kong). After gathering all the information, C&E decided not to prosecute any individuals but, nonetheless, insisted on an application for forfeiture.

After a full-blown trial, Deputy Magistrate Nicole Chun found that the Claimant (the recipient who resides in Macau) had proved, on the balance of probabilities, that she had not in any way participated, either by design or negligence, in the contravention that resulted in the cigars being liable to forfeiture. All the cigars were therefore returned to the Claimant unconditionally. The Court also refused the C&E’s application for the Claimant to pay administrative and storage costs for the handling and storing of the cigars.

Simon So appeared with Jack Hui for the Claimant in the forfeiture application which lasted for 3 days.