Parliament
Sun Xueling: Victims of counterfeit goods on e-commerce can seek recourse via CASE, tribunal, or courts
Victims of counterfeit purchases on e-commerce platforms can seek recourse via CASE, the Small Claims Tribunal, or civil proceedings, said Minister of State Sun Xueling. Responding to MP Tan Wu Meng’s PQ on 27 Feb, she explained that cases are assessed based on facts, and if sellers knowingly misrepresent goods, they may face charges under the Trade Marks Act or Penal Code. Legal aid is available for those in need.
Victims who purchase counterfeit merchandise on e-commerce platforms can seek recourse through various legal channels, including lodging complaints with the Consumer Association of Singapore (CASE), filing claims in the Small Claims Tribunal, or pursuing civil proceedings in court, said Minister of State for Home Affairs Sun Xueling in response to a parliamentary question by MP Tan Wu Meng.
During Parliamentary sitting on 27 February, Jurong GRC MP Dr Tan raised concerns about fraudulent or counterfeit merchandise sold on e-commerce platforms in Singapore.
He inquired about the number of police reports filed in 2023 and 2024, the considerations for classifying cases as commercial disputes rather than cheating or scams, and the available recourse for affected buyers.
In response, Sun explained that the police assess cases based on the full facts and circumstances.
The sale of counterfeit goods may be an offence under the Trade Marks Act 1998, and if deception is involved, it could also be considered cheating under Section 420 of the Penal Code.
Dr Tan followed up with a supplementary question, citing a Clementi resident who purchased counterfeit branded merchandise via Carousell.
Despite filing a police report, the case was deemed a contractual dispute and referred to CASE, which could not assist as the transaction was between private individuals.
The resident, having limited means, faced difficulties seeking legal redress.
Sun reiterated that police investigations would determine if the seller knowingly misrepresented the counterfeit merchandise.
If so, the case could be classified under both the Trade Marks Act and cheating under the Penal Code.
She acknowledged the resident’s difficulties and advised that those facing financial constraints could seek legal aid for assistance in pursuing civil remedies.
