“…it becomes relevant to consider the purpose of the Registration of Business Names Act. The law does not prohibit anyone from carrying on business either alone or in partnership with others under a name assumed for that purpose, but in order to enable persons doing business with the individual or partnership to discover who the person or persons behind the name are the law requires these particulars to be registered, and the true names of the individual or the partners have to be shown in all trade catalogues, trade circulars and business letters sent out under the registered name. In this Act, as in much other legislation affecting business transactions, the legislature has no doubt proceeded on the assumption that most people will act with that degree of honesty without which business in the modern world, with its elaborate arrangements for giving and receiving credit, would be impossible. The Registrar of Business Names is therefore not bound to inquire into the correctness of the particulars submitted to him. It may even be true to say that he is not called on to form a belief as to the correctness of every detail. But as regards the genuineness of the whole application form, including the question whether it shows the true names of the persons doing business under the registered name and is signed by them, we consider that the correct statement of the position is that the Registrar is entitled to assume it if he has no reason for any doubts about it, but that unless he does believe the form to be genuine it is his duty to refuse to register the name. If, for example, he were to see his own name stated as that of a member of a firm with which he had no concern it would be absurd to say that he was obliged to register the name of the firm.” Per LIONEL BRETT, JSC in DOMINGO V. THE QUEEN (1963) LCER-225(SC) (Pp 11 – 13 Paras E – A)