Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

PRICE ORDER BREACHES

A recent report of prosecutions at Kawhia for alleged breaches of price orders can only be understood to refer to several charges, which is not correct, as there was only one charge for each alleged offence. The price order breach referred to the sale ot one tin of a brand of enamel paint. It was the first occasion on which we had stocked this line, and although we tried to ascertain the price order charge for it, we were unable to trace it. We arrived at the conclusion that it was not covered by one, and the only reasonable procedure was for us to mark it up at the lowest economic price to charge, which turned out to be an excess of sixpence on an order that apparently existed. The fine for this breach was £30, with Court costs added. The second charge was an alleged breach by omitting to display a price order relating to the enamel. The fine for this alleged offence was £5, with costs. This breach was our first offence, whereas the report could be understood to mean that previous breaches of this obligation have come before the Court, which is incorrect. MARTIN OLDBURY AND CO.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19450720.2.35.4

Bibliographic details

PRICE ORDER BREACHES, Auckland Star, Volume LXXVI, Issue 170, 20 July 1945

Word Count
203

PRICE ORDER BREACHES Auckland Star, Volume LXXVI, Issue 170, 20 July 1945

Working