Health Products Act 2007 · 2020 Revised Edition · Part 4 · Supply of Health Products
16. Prohibition against supply of health products that are adulterated, counterfeits, etc.
Feedback & supportA person must not supply, or procure or arrange for the supply of, any health product which is —
supply
“supply”, in relation to a health product, means to transfer possession of the health product by any means whether or not for reward, and includes the following:(a)to sell the health product, whether by retail, wholesale or auction;(b)to expose or display the health product as an invitation to treat;(c)to transfer possession of the health product by exchange, gift, lease, loan, hire or hire-purchase;(d)to supply the health product in connection with —(i)a contract for the provision of any goods or the performance of any service; or(ii)any advertising, sponsorship or promotional activity;(e)to supply the health product by way of administration to or application in any person in the course of any diagnosis, treatment or test;(f)to offer, agree or attempt to supply the health product in any of the ways described in paragraphs (a) to (e) or to cause or permit the health product to be so supplied;(g)to keep or possess the health product for the purpose of supplying it in any of the ways described in paragraphs (a) to (f);
an adulterated health product;
a counterfeit health product;
a health product that has been tampered with; or
an unwholesome health product.
Any person who contravenes subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction —
in the case of an offence under subsection (1)(d), to a fine not exceeding $50,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or to both; and
in the case of an offence under subsection (1)(a), (b) or (c), to a fine not exceeding $100,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years or to both.
In any proceedings for an offence under subsection (1), it is a defence for the accused to prove that —
the accused —
did not know;
had no reason to believe; and
could not, with reasonable diligence, have ascertained,that the health product was in contravention of that subsection; and
the accused had taken all such precautions and exercised all such due diligence as could reasonably be expected of the accused in the circumstances to ensure that the health product did not contravene that subsection.