Page 98 of 201
154
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
The vast majority of cases are resolved after negotiations between the NO and the enterprises concerned. Should the NO be unsuccessful in his efforts, he can bring the case before the Market Court.
The Market Court is a special tribunal consisting of jurists, economic experts and representatives of the business community and consumers. If the Market Court finds harmful effects according to the law, it initiates negotiations to remedy the situation. Should the Market Court not succeed in securing a satisfactory agreement, it has certain powers of authority. The Court may prohibit an entrepreneur from applying restrictive business practices: it may order him to supply goods on conditions equivalent to those offered to other enterprises or to otherwise modify a restrictive business practice. The Court can also decree a maximum price for a particular commodity. A prohibition or injunction may be issued under penalty of an administrative fine. Except for cases of major importance the NO has similar powers of authority.
The Act also contains a system for merger control. If an entrepreneur through a certain acquisition attains a dominant position and this leads to harmful effects contrary to the public interests, the Market Court shall endeavor to prevent the harmful effects through negotiations. As a last resort the Court can prohibit an acquisition. A prohibition is enforceable against the entrepreneur only if the Government upholds it. The NO makes the initial investigations and decides whether an acquisition shall be brought before the Court.
Other tasks for the NO include taking action against regulatory measures which unduly hinder competition and giving wide publicity to competition matters.
The Consumer Ombudsman (KO)
Like the NO, the Consumer Ombudsman is appointed by the Government. He took office in 1971, with the duty of ensuring that two laws for protection of consumers are observed: the Marketing Act and the Unfair Contract Terms Act.
In 1976, the Office of the KO and the National Board for Consumer Policies were fused into a single body, headed by the KO. At the same time a new and extended Marketing Act came into force.
This Act applies to firms or traders marketing goods, services, etc.: it covers neither the advertising of opinions nor political propaganda, which are protected by the Freedom of the Press Act. Any commercial marketing practices may be prohibited if they are contrary to accepted business practices or considered improper in some other way. This is to protect consumers and traders mainly against misleading advertising and the Act can be invoked when, for instance, an advertiser promises too much or attracts customers with a price which he later fails to maintain.
There is an important principle in this Act (section regarding misleading advice), 'the reverse burden of proof,' according to which the person responsible for any marketing practice must be able to prove the correctness of the information, claims and promises presented in his advertisements, packaging, advertising material, etc.
As of 1976, firms and other persons engaged in marketing may be enjoined in advertising, or in any other form of marketing, to provide information that is of special importance to consumers, such as particulars about the price or nature of the goods or services. Where there is a special risk that a commodity may harm a person or property, its sale or hire may be prohibited. Goods which clearly prove to be unfit for their main purpose may also be prohibited.
The Unfair Contract Terms Act has been drawn up to protect consumers against unreasonable contract terms used by traders, especially in standardized contract forms for sale of consumer durables and services. According to this Act, if the terms of a contract unreasonably favor the seller at the expense of the consumer, these terms may be prohibited.
The Secretariat of the Consumer Ombudsman, directly under the Director General of the National Board for Consumer Policies who is also the Consumer Ombudsman, issues injunctions, refers cases to the Market Court, and deals with matters relating to prosecutions.
When the Board, either as the result of a notification from outside or in the course of its own scrutiny, notices an undesirable marketing action or condition in a contract, it attempts first to have the matter put right voluntarily, by discussing it with those responsible. If a correction cannot be agreed upon, the KO can refer the case to the Market Court, requesting that the entrepreneur be
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 98 of 201
155
prohibited from continuing to use the undesirable marketing practice or condition in the contract. An injunction by the Market Court is usually issued on penalty of a fine. There is no appeal against a decision of the Market Court. The Board deals with 4,500-5,500 cases every year, which concern the Marketing Act. About 20 cases a year are referred to the Market Court.
The Equal Opportunities Ombudsman (JämO) The Act on Equality between Women and Men at Work came into effect on July 1, 1980. The Act is intended to promote the equal rights of men and women with respect to work, working conditions and development potential on the job. The law includes a prohibition against discrimination on the grounds of sex and a demand for active measures to promote equality at the workplace.
The Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman (JämO) and the Equal Opportunities Commission were established at the same time to ensure that the law is observed. The JämO should first of all attempt to persuade the employers to follow the law by voluntary agreement. If the JämO is unable to negotiate a settlement in a case of discrimination, the case can be brought before the Labor Court. If the JämO seeks unsuccessfully to persuade employers to take more active measures for the promotion of equality, an application can be submitted to the Equal Opportunities Commission requesting an injunction to be passed directing the employer to take appropriate measures.
The JämO should also participate in the common efforts to promote equality at work and form public opinion.
The JämO has in the majority of cases negotiated settlements with the employers involved, but by July 1984, 23 cases had been summoned to the Labor Court (two of which have since been settled out of court). Judgment has been pronounced on nine cases so far of which six were in favor of the JämO.
THE PRESS OMBUDSMAN (PO)
The Swedish Press Council or Court of Honor (POn), founded in 1916, is the oldest tribunal of its kind in the world. It was set up by the National Press Club (PK), the Union of Journalists (SJF) and the Newspaper Publishers Association (TU).
The Press Council is composed of a judge, who acts as chairman, one representative each from the PK, the SJF and the TU, plus two representatives of the general public who must not have any ties with newspaper publishers or press organizations.
The Office of Press Ombudsman for the General Public was established in 1969. Its holder is appointed by a special committee consisting of the JO, and the chairmen of both the Swedish Bar Association and the Press Council.
Before the new Office was created, complaints regarding violations of good newspaper practice were filed with the Press Council, but now they go first to the PO, who is also empowered to take up matters on his own initiative.
Any interested person can protest to the PO against a newspaper item which he considers to be a violation of sound press ethics. But the person concerned by the article has to give his consent if the complaint is going to lead to censure of the newspaper.
When a complaint is made to the PO, his task is to ascertain whether it can be met by a correction or a reply in the newspaper concerned. Contact may be taken with the newspaper for this purpose. Where the matter cannot be settled that way, the PO may, if he finds cause to assume that good newspaper practice has been disregarded, undertake an inquiry, first of all by asking the opinion of the newspaper's responsible publisher.
The inquiry concluded, the PO then has three alternatives:
1. the matter is not considered to warrant a rebuke of the newspaper; 2. the evidence obtained is weighty enough to warrant review by the Press Council; or 3. minor violations of good newspaper practice can be censured by the PO without recourse to the Press Council.
Alternatives 1. and 3. may be appealed to the Press Council. Nothing prevents the complainant from bringing suit before a regular court of law after review by the PO and the Press Council.
Page 98 of 201
154
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
The vast majority of cases are resolved after negotiations between the NO and the enterprises concerned. Should the NO be unsuccessful in his efforts, he can bring the case before the Market Court.
The Market Court is a special tribunal consisting of jurists, economic experts and representatives of the business community and consumers. If the Market Court finds harmful effects according to the law, it initiates negotiations to remedy the situation. Should the Market Court not succeed in securing a satisfactory agreement, it has certain powers of authority. The Court may prohibit an entrepreneur from applying restrictive business practices: it may order him to supply goods on conditions equivalent to those offered to other enterprises or to otherwise modify a restrictive business practice. The Court can also decree a maximum price for a particular commodity. A prohibition or injunction may be issued under penalty of an administrative one. Except for cases of major importance the NO has similar powers of authority.
The Act also contains a system for merger control. If an entrepreneur through a certain acquisition attains a dominant position and this leads to harmful effects contrary to the public interests, the Market Court shall endeavor to prevent the harmful effects through negotiations. As a last resort the Court can prohibit an acquisition. A prohibition is enforceable against the entrepreneur only if the Government upholds it. The NO makes the initial investigations and decides whether an acquisition shall be brought before the Court.
Other tasks for the NO include taking action against regulatory measures which unduly hinder competition and giving wide publicity to competition matters.
The Consumer Ombudsman (KO)
Like the NO, the Consumer Ombudsman is appointed by the Government. He took office in 1971, with the duty of ensuring that two laws for protection of consumers are observed: the Marketing Act and the Unfair Contract Terms Act.
In 1976, the Office of the KO and the National Board for Consumer Policies were fused into a single body, headed by the KO. At the same time a new and extended Marketing Act came into force.
This Act applies to firms or traders marketing goods, services, etc.: it covers neither the advertising of opinions nor political propaganda, which are protected by the Freedom of the Press Act. Any commercial marketing practices may be prohibited if they are contrary to accepted business practices or considered improper in some other way. This is to protect consumers and traders mainly against misleading advertising and the Act can be invoked when, for instance, an advertiser promises too much or attracts customers with a price which he later fails to maintain.
There is an important principle in this Act (section regarding misleading advice), 'the reverse burden of proof,' according to which the person responsible for any marketing practice must be able to prove the correctness of the information, claims and promises presented in his advertisements, packaging, advertising material, etc.
As of 1976, firms and other persons engaged in marketing may be enjoined in advertising, or in any other form of marketing, to provide information that is of special importance to consumers, such as particulars about the price or nature of the goods or services. Where there is a special risk that a commodity may harm a person or property, its sale or hire may be prohibited. Goods which clearly prove to be unfit for their main purpose may also be prohibited.
The Unfair Contract Terms Act has been drawn up to protect consumers against unreasonable contract terms used by traders, especially in standardized contract forms for sale of consumer durables and services. According to this Act, if the terms of a contract unreasonably favor the seller at the expense of the consumer, these terms may be prohibited.
The Secretariat of the Consumer Ombudsman, directly under the Director General of the National Board for Consumer Policies who is also the Consumer Ombudsman, issues injunctions, refers cases to the Market Court, and deals with matters relating to prosecutions.
When the Board, either as the result of a notification from outside or in the course of its own scrutiny, notices an undesirable marketing action or condition in a contract, it attempts first to have the matter put right voluntarily, by discussing it with those responsible. If a correction cannot be agreed upon, the KO can refer the case to the Market Court, requesting that the entrepreneur be
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 98 of 201
155
prohibited from continuing to use the undesirable marketing practice or condition in the contract. An injunction by the Market Court is usually issued on penalty of a fine. There is no appeal against 2 500-3 000 of a decision of the Market Court. The Board deals with 4 500-5 500 cases every year, which concern the Marketing Act. About 20 cases a year are referred to the Market Court.
The Equal Opportunities Ombudsman (JämO) The Act on Equality between Women and Men at Work came into effect on July 1, 1980. The Act is intended to promote the equal rights of men and women with respect to work, working conditions and development potential on the job. The law includes a prohibition against discrimination on the grounds of sex and a demand for active measures to promote equality at the workplace.
The Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman (JämO) and the Equal Opportunities Commis- sion were established at the same time to ensure that the law is observed. The JämO should first of all attempt to persuade the employers to follow the law by voluntary agreement. If the JämO is unable to negotiate a settlement in a case of discrimination, the case can be brought before the Labor Court. If the JämO seeks unsuccessfully to persuade employers to take more active measures for the promotion of equality, an application can be submitted to the Equal Opportunities Commission requesting an injunction to be passed directing the employer to take appropriate
measures.
The Jämo should also participate in the common efforts to promote equality at work and form public opinion.
The JämO has in the majority of cases negotiated settlements with the employers involved, but by July 1984, 23 cases had been summoned to the Labor Court (two of which have since been settled out of court). Judgment has been pronounced on nine cases so far of which six were in favor of the JämO.
THE PRESS OMBUDSMAN (PO)
The Swedish Press Council or Court of Honor (POn), founded in 1916, is the oldest tribunal of its kind in the world. It was set up by the National Press Club (PK), the Union of Journalists (SJF) and the Newspaper Publishers Association (TU).
The Press Council is composed of a judge, who acts as chairman, one representative each from the PK, the SJF and the TU, plus two representatives of the general public who must not have any ties with newspaper publishers or press organizations.
The Office of Press Ombudsman for the General Public was established in 1969. Its holder is appointed by a special committee consisting of the JO, and the chairmen of both the Swedish Bar Association and the Press Council.
Before the new Office was created, complaints regarding violations of good newspaper practice were filed with the Press Council, but now they go first to the PO, who is also empowered to take up matters on his own initiative.
Any interested person can protest to the PO against a newspaper item which he considers to be a violation of sound press ethics. But the person concerned by the article has to give his consent if the complaint is going to lead to censure of the newspaper.
When a complaint is made to the PO, his task is to ascertain whether it can be met by a correction or a reply in the newspaper concerned. Contact may be taken with the newspaper for this purpose. Where the matter cannot be settled that way, the PO may, if he finds cause to assume that good newspaper practice has been disregarded, undertake an inquiry, first of all by asking the opinion of the newspaper's responsible publisher.
The inquiry concluded, the PO then has three alternatives:
1. the matter is not considered to warrant a rebuke of the newspaper; 2. the evidence obtained is weighty enough to warrant review by the Press Council; or 3. minor violations of good newspaper practice can be censured by the PO without recourse to the Press Council.
Alternatives 1. and 3. may be appealed to the Press Council. Nothing prevents the complainant from bringing suit before a regular court of law after review by the PO and the Press Council.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.