London Borough of Merton v. Sinclair Collis Ltd.

A local government conducted test purchases by children from cigarette vending machines. The tobacco company that owns the vending machines argued that it could not be liable under a particular section of the law prohibiting the sale of tobacco to children by “persons”. The court ruled that the law’s use of the word “person” could include a company and that the tobacco company could be liable under this provision of the law.

London Borough of Merton v. Sinclair Collins, Ltd., 2010 EWHC 2089 (Admin) (2010).

  • United Kingdom
  • Nov 5, 2010
  • High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, The Administrative Court
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff The Queen on the Application of London Borough of Merton

Defendant Sinclair Collins Limited

Legislation Cited

Children and Young Persons Act 1933

Related Documents

Type of Litigation

Tobacco Control Topics

Substantive Issues

Type of Tobacco Product

None

"In 1908, as now, the Interpretation Act, then 1889, now 1978, defines "person" as including, "unless the contrary intention appears", "a body of persons corporate or unincorporate". The contrary intention obviously appears in relation to the second use of "person". A body of persons corporate or unincorporate cannot be under the age of 16/18. The person to whom the tobacco is sold, therefore, must be a real human being under the age of 16/18. It does not follow that the person referred to in the first instance must also be an individual. The draftsman in 1908 would have had in mind the express provision in the 1889 Act in section 2(1): "In the construction of every enactment relating to an offence punishable on indictment or on summary conviction ... the expression 'person' shall, unless the contrary intention appears, include a body corporate." Nothing could be clearer. Indeed, it is difficult to understand a policy reason why the draftsman or Parliament should have wished to exclude an incorporated body from those who might commit an offence under section 7(1). Had they done so then every tobacconist in the country who wished to continue selling cigarettes to children would have incorporated a company to carry on his business."