Coopen v Moore (No.2) (1898) Preview
BACK TO CRIMINAL LAW
Coopen v Moore (No.2) (1898)
Coopen v Moore (No.2) (1898)

The person owned six shops. He was selling ham that did not state their place of origin. He instructed his staff of this. One of the hams was sold as a 'Scotch Ham' even though it was American. The owner was selling goods with a false trade description and was convicted of this.

Your Are Correct !
Your Are Incorrect !