Ruling on Paragraph 141Q(2)(a) of the Customs Act 1967 Appeal No.TRK(K)-1-2008



The Respondent has raised the issue whether a consultant can represent the Appellant in view of paragraph 141Q (2) (a) of the Customs Act 1967, he not being a 'full-time paid employee' of the company.

The shoulder note of Section 141Q reads 'No advocate and solicitor at hearing'.

Subsection (1) provides that 'An advocate and solicitor shall not be allowed to represent an appellant at the hearing of an appeal before the Tribunal'.

Subsection (2) goes on to say that 'Notwithstanding subsection (1) and Section 37 of the Legal Profession Act 1976-

  1. a corporation or an unincorporated body of persons may be represented by a full-time paid employee of the corporation or body; or
  2. (Not relevant here)'


The interpretation to subsection (2) is that an advocate and solicitor who is a full-time paid employee of the company can represent it before the Tribunal i.e. this is the exception to the prohibition against advocates and solicitors appearing before the Tribunal in subsection (1).


It is my opinion that subsection (2) does not apply to any other category of persons as it must be read together with subsection (1).


There is no express prohibition against any other person appearing before the Tribunal provided they are duly authorised by the company. This is in fact set out in Para. (6) of 'Instructions to Appellant' annexed to Form A (Notice of Appeal).

Para. (6) reads -


'The appellant may be represented by any person authorised by the appellant, except an advocate and solicitor' (as amended by P.U. (A) 272 (2007))


I therefore hold that the Appellant can be represented by its duly appointed representative, a consultant who is not an advocate and solicitor.


12 May 2008