Compiled from an official source version. Later amendments or repeals may not be reflected; the official text prevails. · Read the official text ↗
Jurisdiction of court
29. Despite any provision to the contrary in the Criminal Procedure Code 2010, a District Court and a Magistrate’s Court have jurisdiction to try any offence under this Act and have power to impose the full penalty or punishment in respect of any offence under this Act.
Proceedings for offences
30.—(1) The summons in any such proceedings must not be made returnable in less than 14 days from the date on which it is served. (2) A copy of the authorised analyst’s certificate (if any) on which the prosecution is based, must be served with the summons.
No defence that purchaser bought for analysis
31. In any proceedings under this Act, it is not a defence that the purchaser bought any food or food contact article for analysis or examination and therefore was not prejudiced.[48/2017]
No defence that offence not wilfully committed
32. In a prosecution for selling any food or food contact article contrary to this Act, it is not a defence that the accused did not act wilfully, unless the accused also proves that the accused took all reasonable steps to ascertain that the sale of the food or food contact article would not constitute an offence under this Act.[48/2017]
Reliance on written warranty a good defence
33.—(1) Subject to this section, it is a good defence in any prosecution for an offence under Part 3 if the accused proves that —(a) the accused purchased the food or food contact article sold by the accused in reliance on a written warranty or other written statement as to the nature of the food or food contact article purchased, signed by or on behalf of the person from whom the accused purchased the food or food contact article; (b) the accused had no reason to believe that the food or food contact article sold did not conform to such warranty or statement; and (c) if the food or food contact article had truly conformed to such warranty or statement, the sale of the food or food contact article by the accused would not have constituted the offence charged against the accused.[48/2017] (2) No warranty or other written statement given or made by a person resident outside Singapore is a defence under this section, unless the accused proves that the accused had taken reasonable steps to ascertain and did in fact believe in the truth of the matters set out in such warranty or statement. (3) No warranty or other written statement is a defence in any prosecution, unless the accused has, within 7 days after service of the summons, delivered to the prosecutor a copy of the warranty or statement with a written notice stating that the accused intends to rely on the warranty or statement and specifying the name and address of the person from whom the accused received it, and has also within the same time sent by registered post a like notice of the accused’s intention to such person. (4) When the accused is an employee or agent of the person who purchased the food or food contact article under such a warranty or written statement, the accused is, if the accused further proves that the accused had no reason to believe that the article did not conform to the warranty or statement, entitled to the benefit of this section in the same manner and to the same extent as the accused’s employer or principal would have been, if the accused’s employer or principal had been the accused.[48/2017] (5) Any person who in respect of any food or food contact article sold by the person as principal or agent gives to the purchaser a false written warranty shall be guilty of an offence, unless that person proves to the satisfaction of the court that when that person gave the warranty that person had reason to believe that the statements or descriptions contained in the warranty were true.[48/2017]
Authorised analyst’s certificate to be prima facie evidence
34.—(1) The production by the prosecutor of a certificate of analysis purporting to be under the hand of an authorised analyst is sufficient evidence of the facts stated in the certificate, unless the accused requires the authorised analyst to be called as a witness, in which case the accused must give notice thereof to the prosecutor at least 3 clear days before the day on which the summons is returnable. (2) In like manner the production by the accused of a certificate of analysis purporting to be under the hand of an authorised analyst is sufficient evidence of the facts stated in the certificate, unless the prosecutor requires the authorised analyst to be called as a witness. (3) A copy of the certificate mentioned in subsection (2) must be sent to the prosecutor at least 3 clear days before the day fixed for the hearing of the summons, and, if it is not so sent, the District Court or the Magistrate’s Court (as the case may be) may adjourn the hearing on any terms that it thinks proper.
Non-disclosure of information
36.—(1) A prosecutor or witness in any prosecution under this Act must not be compelled to disclose the fact that he or she received any information or the nature of the information or the name of any person who gave the information. (2) An authorised officer appearing as a prosecutor or witness must not be compelled to produce any confidential report or document made or received by him or her in his or her official capacity or to make any statement in relation to that report or document.
Recovery of fees and other expenses incidental to prosecution
37.—(1) When any person is convicted of an offence under this Act, the court may order the person to pay all fees and other expenses incidental to the analysis of any food or food contact article in respect of which the conviction is obtained, and any other reasonable expenses incurred by the prosecution, must be paid by the person convicted.[48/2017; 11/2019] (2) All such fees and expenses are recoverable in the same manner as a fine is recoverable.
Fees, etc., payable to Agency
38. All fees, charges and moneys collected under this Act (except financial penalties and composition sums collected under sections 46 and 50) must be paid to the Agency.[48/2017; 11/2019]
Appeal
39. Any person aggrieved by any sentence or order under this Act passed or made by a District Court or a Magistrate’s Court may appeal to the General Division of the High Court against that sentence or order.[40/2019]
Provisions on this page are reproduced verbatim from official open data. See the attribution line.
Compiled from an official source version. Later amendments or repeals may not be reflected; the official text prevails. Read the official text ↗
Source: Singapore Statutes Online (Attorney-General's Chambers), © Government of Singapore.
The Singapore legislation on this platform is subject to copyright of the Singapore Government and is used/reproduced for the purposes of this platform with the permission of the Attorney-General's Chambers. Users of this platform may check Singapore Statutes Online for the latest version of the Singapore legislation.