Young Titan Enterprise Co., Ltd.'s was complained for its false representations on the age and origin of the imported alcoholic beverages
Chinese Taipei
Case:
Young Titan Enterprise Co., Ltd.'s was complained for its false representations on the age and origin of the imported alcoholic beverages
Key words:
misleading the consumer, false representations on the age and place of origin
Reference:
Fair Trade Commission Decision of 31 December 1997 (the 322nd Commission Meeting); Disposition (87) Kung Ch'u Tzu No. 026
Industry:
Import Trading (5601)
Relevant Laws:
Article 21(1) of the Fair Trade Law
Summary:
Article 21(1) of the Fair Trade Law stipulates that "an enterprise shall not make, on goods or in advertisements relating thereto, any false, untrue or misleading presentation which may likely cause confusion to or mistake by consumers such as their price, quantity, quality, content, manufacturing process, date of manufacturing, validity period, use method, purpose of use, place of origin, manufacturer, place of manufacturing, processor and place of processing" Thus, any enterprise selling any products bearing false, untrue or misleading representations regarding quality, content, and the place of origin or manufacturer shall be held in violation the said provision.
The age of a whisky product refers to the maturation period during which the liquor distilled from fermented grain mash is kept in a wooden cask. The moment the distilled liquor is taken out of the wooden cask to be packaged in a glass bottle, accumulation of the maturation period stops. As for blended whisky product, the age shall be the shortest maturation period of the spirits among the blended product. This definition rule of liquor and labeling of age claim is commonly applied by forty countries, including European Union countries, England, the U.S.A., Canada, and Australia. Expressions such as "Years Old," and "Aged Year" are well known to the consumer as representations of the maturation period. The higher the age claim number, the better the quality, and the higher the price. The respondent is an importer of liquor including whisky products, and should be well informed of the various consumer information on whisky, as well as the laws and regulations applied by different countries regarding the definition and labeling of whisky products. The respondent imported the following three alcoholic beverages: ROYAL RESERVE OLD 21 RARE PREMIUM WHISKY, the HAMPTON BLENDED WHISKY RARE 15 AGED, and the CROWLEY'S BLENDED 17 WHISKY. However, the literal and numerical representations depicted on the exterior packaging could easily mislead consumers into making purchases by mistaking the representations as to the age claim of the whisky product because the position and type font of the labeling resembles that of the an ordinary whisky product's age claim. The respondent argued that the representation was only about numbers and that the packaging case was locally made, while the Chinese-language and English-language labels were affixed before the product came into Chinese Taipei. The respondent also contended that the Taiwan Tobacco and Wine Monopoly Bureau [TTWMB] had approved the importation. However, the respondent failed to substantiate the meaning of the numbers or provide relevant proof of its origin. For the imported whisky whose bottles were labeled with the “numbers”, the respondent further manufactured packaging cases locally, which not only depicted the numbers but also had additional notes of "OLD RARE", "RARE AGED," and "RARE RESERVE" next to the numbers. It is obvious the intention of the respondent was to mislead consumers into making purchase.
The investigation showed the respondent also imported LAUDER'S BLENDED SCOTCH WHISKY 15. Both the label and packaging case of the said product carried such expressions as "FULLY MATURED FIFTEEN YEARS OLD," and "15 YEARS OLD" (meaning the product went through a maturation period of fifteen years). Such representation was apparently inconsistent with the "OVER THREE YEARS" description given in the import declaration and the certificate of origin. The respondent admitted that the product was not a whisky of fifteen years of age and the labeled age claim was erroneous. The respondent contended that it had already stopped its import of the said product and had the misrepresented product recalled for correction. However, the personnel this Commission dispatched for survey in the market found that the product was still being sold, together with the three products mentioned in paragraph 2. The respondent has neither recalled the product nor corrected the misrepresentation. The respondent obviously made false, untrue and misleading representations regarding the age claim and was in violation of Article 21(1) of the Fair Trade Law.
The definition of Scotch whisky shall be in accordance with the Scotch Whisky Act 1988 and the definition and process of manufacturing specified in the Scotch Whisky Order 1990. With reference to the definition adopted in the U.S.A., Canada, Australia and other countries, it is the internationally adopted standard that a Scotch whisky is a whisky product originating from Scotland. Judgments rendered by courts of law in many countries regarding the representation of Scotch whisky have ruled to prohibit any whisky product not originating in Scotland to carry such representations as "Scotch whisky," "blended Scotch whisky," or any other similar indication. In addition, the TTWMB indicated in its letter that, according to the definition under English law, Scotch whisky must be a whisky product fermented, distilled and matured in Scotland for at least three years; otherwise the product cannot carry the representation of Scotch whisky. Representation of this type is apparently an indication of the place of origin. The ROYAL RESERVE OLD 21 RARE PREMIUM WHISKY imported by the respondent was a product made in the U.S.A. The CROWLEY'S BLENDED 17 WHISKY was a product of France. Neither of the two was imported from Scotland while carry a "Scotch Whisky" label or indication on their exterior packaging case (both in the front and in the back) in Chinese and English. Such misrepresentations misled consumers into believing the place of origin of the two products was Scotland and constituted false and misleading representations regarding place of origin and labeling in violation of Article 21(1) of the Fair Trade Law.
The respondent's act of labeling on the alcohol beverages it imported for sale with false and misleading representations regarding the age claim and place of origin was a violation of Article 21(1) of the Fair Trade Law.
Summarized by Li, Wen-hsiu
Supervised by Wu, Ting-hung
Appendix:
Young Titan Enterprise Co., Ltd.'s Uniform Invoice No.: 14052149