Wing On & Co Ltd v Collector of Customs (NSW)
Case
•
[1938] HCA 71
•6 June 1938
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Wing On & Co Ltd v Collector of Customs (NSW) [1938] HCA 71
[1938] HCA 71
6 June 1938
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of *Wing On & Co Ltd v Collector of Customs (NSW)* concerned a dispute over unpaid customs duties on cigarette papers imported into Australia. The Collector of Customs for New South Wales claimed from Wing On & Co Ltd, a merchant and produce agent, the sum of £352 18s. 6d. in customs duty. The Collector alleged that the defendant company was the owner of the goods within the meaning of the *Customs Act 1901-1935*, which had been imported without entry or payment of duty. The defendant company had purchased the unentered goods from the importer, a seaman, and subsequently resold them to a third party, all while knowing that customs duty had not been paid.
The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the defendant company, as a subsequent purchaser of imported goods that had not been entered for customs duty, remained liable to pay the unpaid duty. Specifically, the court had to determine the scope and meaning of "owner" as defined in section 4 and applied in section 153 of the *Customs Act 1901-1935*, and whether this liability extended beyond the initial importer to subsequent possessors or those with control and power of disposition over the goods.
The High Court, affirming the decision of Starke J., held that the defendant company was liable to pay the unpaid customs duty. The Court reasoned that section 153 of the *Customs Act* establishes duties as Crown debts charged upon the goods and payable by the owner. The definition of "owner" in section 4 is broad, encompassing not only the importer but also any person possessed of, or having control or power of disposition over, the goods. The Court found that the defendant company, by purchasing and taking possession of the uncustomed goods, and exercising control and power of disposition over them, became an "owner" within the extended meaning of the Act. This liability, the Court held, was not limited to the importer at the time of importation but extended to any person who subsequently became an owner of goods subject to unpaid customs duties, until those duties were paid. The charge on the goods and the personal liability of the owner followed the goods and the ownership until the duty was discharged.
The appeal by Wing On & Co Ltd was dismissed, with the Court ordering that the company pay the costs of the appeal.
The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the defendant company, as a subsequent purchaser of imported goods that had not been entered for customs duty, remained liable to pay the unpaid duty. Specifically, the court had to determine the scope and meaning of "owner" as defined in section 4 and applied in section 153 of the *Customs Act 1901-1935*, and whether this liability extended beyond the initial importer to subsequent possessors or those with control and power of disposition over the goods.
The High Court, affirming the decision of Starke J., held that the defendant company was liable to pay the unpaid customs duty. The Court reasoned that section 153 of the *Customs Act* establishes duties as Crown debts charged upon the goods and payable by the owner. The definition of "owner" in section 4 is broad, encompassing not only the importer but also any person possessed of, or having control or power of disposition over, the goods. The Court found that the defendant company, by purchasing and taking possession of the uncustomed goods, and exercising control and power of disposition over them, became an "owner" within the extended meaning of the Act. This liability, the Court held, was not limited to the importer at the time of importation but extended to any person who subsequently became an owner of goods subject to unpaid customs duties, until those duties were paid. The charge on the goods and the personal liability of the owner followed the goods and the ownership until the duty was discharged.
The appeal by Wing On & Co Ltd was dismissed, with the Court ordering that the company pay the costs of the appeal.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
-
Tax Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Statutory Construction
-
Jurisdiction
-
Appeal
-
Standing
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Moama Refinery Pty Ltd v Chief Executive Officer of Customs [2001] FCA 1287
Cases Citing This Decision
29
Comptroller General of Customs v Zappia
[2018] HCA 54
Comptroller General of Customs v Zappia
[2018] HCA 54
Comptroller General of Customs v Zappia
[2018] HCA 54
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0
Cited Sections