The Customs and Excise Department said Wednesday it is seeking legal advice on whether to prosecute the company if it is found to have used misleading food labels.

Under the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, it is illegal to sell food not suitable for human consumption, a spokesman said.

"If the supermarket is suspected to have violated the Trade Descriptions Ordinance, which prohibits people from using fake trademarks or incorrect goods descriptions, the maximum penalty on conviction is a fine of HK$500,000 and five years' imprisonment," he said.

Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food York Chow Yat-ngok reiterated that any shop, regardless of size, will be prosecuted once it is found to be breaching the regulation.

Fred Li Wah-ming, who chairs the Legislative Council's food safety and environmental hygiene panel, urged customs as well as Food and Environmental Hygiene Department officials to work together to prosecute ParknShop if there is sufficient evidence to do so.

He accused the supermarket chain of misleading consumers and called on the authorities to consider banning imports of codfish into Hong Kong.

The scare erupted Tuesday after the Centre for Food Safety said it had received complaints from 14 people who fell ill after consuming oil fish said to have been wrongly labeled as codfish.

The customers said they had bought the products from 11 ParknShop outlets across the territory, including Lantau.

ParknShop moved late Wednesday to defend itself in the wake of concerns over codfish.

"We never had any intention to mislead our customers, and we did not in fact mislead them," said Peter Johnston, general manager for quality, food safety and regulatory affairs for the company's Hong Kong retail branch.

"What ParknShop does is over and above the legal requirements of Hong Kong," Johnston said, pointing out that the government does not require frozen fish to have certificates.

Johnston told an evening press conference that all of its codfish was imported from Indonesia, and came with certificates from the country's health authorities that he calls "reliable."

He said that labels in the store contained lots of information for the consumers, including the fish's scientific name, ruvettus pretiosus.

Johnston added that confusion over the exact name of the fish - blue codfish, codfish and oil fish - was likely to have been caused by translation errors, though he admitted he is in no position to comment on translation issues.

Hong Kong laboratories are conducting DNA testing on fatty acid in the fish to determine their precise species. Johnston said the company has yet to receive results from the analysis.

He pointed out that when the Centre for Food Safety advised ParknShop to take all the fish off the shelves Friday, the stores did so immediately.

Johnston urged customers to contact the supermarket chain, saying the complaints would be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

ParknShop has also apologized to customers and offered refunds for those who can prove they bought the fish from its outlets.

The company further assured consumers it is reviewing internal procedures to ensure customers have sufficient information on what they are buying in future.

The 14 complainants told Centre for Food Safety officials they suffered diarrhea after eating the wrongly labeled "codfish."

Radio phone-in programs were flooded with calls Wednesday from listeners detailing how they have suffered from the side effects of consuming oil fish.

A Mr Chan, who said he had bought oil fish from ParknShop, said the item was wrongly labeled as "codfish" and there were no warning labels.

He said even his dog had a serious bout of diarrhea after eating the oil fish, and a veterinarian told him the fish should not be consumed either by humans or animals.

"I thought I could trust ParknShop, which is a big brand name. But I did not know it is so unscrupulous," Chan said.

A Ms Yeung said she was the first consumer to lodge a complaint about oil fish to the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department two months ago.

She said that after consuming the so- called "codfish" she had purchased from a ParknShop outlet, her young children suffered from excessive secretion of oil from the body, and had to change their trousers more than 10 times a day for two days.

Yeung said the department has failed in its duty to inspect oil fish sold locally.

She said she only noticed that the supermarket started having a warning label on its codfish one month ago.

Another caller, Ms Chan, accused ParknShop of not inspecting oil fish sold at its outlets.

She said the supermarket also denied suggestions that her children's diarrhea was caused by consumption of oil fish.

"They asked me if I had checked clearly and claimed that the booth where I bought the oil fish was in fact rented out to others," Chan said.

Chan King-ming, a professor of biochemistry at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said oil fish is not a type of codfish. He said oil fish has a high oil content that cannot be easily digested and may cause diarrhea.

"It's a kind of fish used for making industrial lubricants and has been banned as a food item in Australia and Japan," Chan said.

The Food and Environmental Hygiene Department warned that since oil fish may cause diarrhea, it is not suitable for human consumption.

It suggested that traders check the correct names of fish on sale, especially prepacked food.

Connie Lau Yin-hing, deputy chief executive of the Consumer Council, said it is not proper for shops and supermarkets to use "ambitious and misleading" food labels.

"If codfish is cheaper than oil fish, would ParknShop use such misleading labeling?" Lau asked.