Luequi v Murray

• Jurisdiction: Trinidad & Tobago
• Judge: Corbin, J.A.
• Judgment Date: 30 July 1976
• Neutral Citation: TT 1976 CA 44
• Docket Number: Civil Appeal No. 237 of 1975
• Court: Court of Appeal (Trinidad and Tobago)
• Date: 30 July 1976

Court of Appeal

Hyatali, C.J.; Corbin, J.A.

Civil Appeal No. 237 of 1975

Luequi

and

Murray

Appearances:

F. Solomon for the appellant.

R. Noel for the respondent.

Commercial Law - Sale of goods — Wholesale and retail prices.

Corbin, J.A.

1 On the 17 ^th April 1974, Price Control Inspector Murray (the respondent) went to the grocery known as J. P.'s Supermarket at 74 Western Main Road, St. James, and purchased a tin of cocoa for $1.79. The schedule to the Price of Goods Regulations in effect on that date shaved that the price of the tin of cocoa should have been $1.74 and the respondent accordingly laid a complaint against the appellant who was manager of the Supermarket at the time.

2 The Magistrate convicted the appellant who appealed on the grounds that:

1

The learned Magistrate erred in holding that the appellant was the Manager as defined in the relevant Ordinance of the business of J. P. Supermarket carried on by J. J. Pereira. 2. The learned Magistrate erred in holding that the Schedule of charges for the price controlled goods had been proven and wrongly admitted into evidence a Schedule which was not authenticated as required by the said Ordinance.

3 At the hearing of the appeal however these grounds were with the leave of the Court abandoned and substituted by the following: The learned Magistrate was wrong in law in holding that the appellant was responsible for the sale charged as being contrary to Reg. 16 (1) (a) and 17 of the Price of Goods Regulations 1972.

4 Regulations 2(4) of the Price of Goods Regulations 1972 provides as follows:

“(4) For the purposes of these Regulations, a person shall be deemed to sell, or to refuse to sell goods, if he is the owner of a business or carried on business during the course of which goods are old or the sale of goods is refused whether or not the sale or refusal to sell is made by him personally or by his agent or employee. An agent or employee who effects a sale or refuses to sell on behalf of his principal or manager shall be deemed to sell or to refuse to sell goods as a wholesaler or retailer, according to the status of his principal or employer.”

5 This Regulation may be conveniently divided into two parts. The first is directed to the ascription of a sale or refusal to sell to the owner of a business or the person carrying on a business whether or not such sale is effected or refused by either of them personally or by his agent or employee. The second is directed to the ascription of a sale to an agent or employee himself who actually sells or refuses so to do. As the transaction...