Page:Dutiable Commodities (Amendment) Ordinance 2018.pdf/10

Dutiable Commodities (Amendment) Ordinance 2018 Part 3 Section 7 ::(b) reasonably satisfied himself or herself, because of the inspection, that the purchaser or recipient was not a minor.
 * (3) If a person (defendant) is charged because of another person’s act, it is a defence for the defendant to establish that, before the intoxicating liquor was sold or supplied, the defendant had taken reasonable measures to prevent intoxicating liquor from being sold or supplied by that other person in the course of business to a minor in a face-to-face distribution.
 * 39. Defences for remote distribution
 * (1) This regulation applies if a person is charged with an offence under regulation 37 in relation to a remote distribution.
 * (2) If a person is charged because of the person’s act, it is a defence for the person to establish that, before the intoxicating liquor was sold or supplied—
 * (a) the person received a declaration to the effect that the purchaser or recipient of the liquor had reached the age of 18 years; and
 * (b) there was no circumstance that caused the person to reasonably suspect that the declaration was false.
 * (3) If a person (defendant) is charged because of another person’s act, it is a defence for the defendant to establish that, before the intoxicating liquor was sold or supplied, the defendant had taken reasonable measures to prevent intoxicating liquor from being sold or supplied by that other person in the course of business to a minor in a remote distribution.