CO129-472 - Others - 1921 — Page 674

667

(2) The provision which determines who are the accountable parties seems unnecessarily harsh. For example, the persons liable for stamping in the case of a conveyance on sale, are "all persons executing". In the United

Kingdom an instrument of transfer of property is usually executed by one only of the principal parties to the transaction the transferor whose interest in and control over the instrument ceases when he hands it to the transferee in exchange for the consideration money. In these circumstances the liability which the Hong Kong Ordinance imposes on a vendor would be an intolerable burden in the United Kingdon,

=

(3)

With regard to the payment of duty under penalty after the due date has elapsed, while the main principles of the United Kingdom Stamp Act are imported, no provision is made similar to that contained in Section 14 (1), (2) and (3) of the Stamp Act, 1891, and it seems that in Hong

Kong no litigation in which an unstamped or insufficiently stamped instrument is tendered in evidence can proceed

until the stamp defect has been cured. An additional step

in litigation is thus created,

(1)

II.

Evasion of Duty.

-

-

The Stamp Act of 1891 contains various provisions,

some of which are reproduced in the Hong Kong Ordinance to

safeguard against the evasion of duty. As the Attomey-

General points out in his report, paragraph ŷ Section 10

of the Ordinance is analogous to the provision of the English

Stamp Act, but while Section 10 makes provision against

evasive splitting of transactions, some further provision

appears to be necessary to prevent loss of duty in cases

of legalised splitting falling under Section 31 (1).

Section 31 (1) is a reproduction of Section 58 (1) of the

Stamp Act, of 1891 but at the time when the latter was

enacted