Chinanews Client Beijing, December 9th (Zhang Ni Peng Ning Ling) As the end of the year is approaching, many foodies are ready to stock up again!
But in the process of consumption, everyone inevitably "steps on thunder."
How to claim for the fake and inferior food?
Who is responsible for e-commerce platforms misleading consumers?
What to do if the production date cannot be found for pre-packaged food?
On the 9th, the Supreme Law issued a judicial interpretation on the trial of civil disputes on food safety, giving clear answers to a series of questions that consumers encounter in their lives.
Data map: employees of a logistics base sorting express delivery (not relevant to the picture and text) Photo by China News Agency reporter Zhang Yu
The e-commerce platform has not registered real-name food operators?
Or bear joint liability!
Statistics show that from 2017 to the first half of 2020, a total of 49,000 new online shopping contract disputes were received by people’s courts at all levels across the country. Among them, about 30% of the disputes involved the responsibility of e-commerce platforms, while food disputes were related to online shopping contracts. Disputes accounted for nearly half of the cases, accounting for 45.65%.
For consumers, online food has certain risks. If the qualifications and reputation of online food operators cannot be guaranteed, it will easily lead to food safety issues.
The judicial interpretation released this time clarifies issues related to online food sales.
The "Interpretation" stipulates that e-commerce platform operators have not performed real-name registration and review of licenses for food operators on the platform in accordance with the law, or have not fulfilled their obligations in accordance with the law, such as reporting or stopping providing services on the online trading platform, thereby harming consumers' legitimate rights and interests. Consumers have the right to claim that the operators of the e-commerce platform and the food operators on the platform bear joint and several liability, so that the e-commerce platform can ensure food safety for consumers.
E-commerce platform labeled "self-operated" selling problem food?
Judicial interpretation: the platform also has to take responsibility!
Do you prefer the label of "self-operated" during online shopping?
According to the above-mentioned "Interpretation", the food sold by the e-commerce platform operator by marking the self-operated business method or the food sold by the self-operated business that is not marked does not meet the food safety standards, and consumers have the right to claim e-commerce The platform operator shall bear the liability for compensation as a food operator.
At the same time, in view of the fact that the logos made by e-commerce platforms in practice mislead consumers, the "Interpretation" stipulates that although e-commerce platform operators do not actually carry out self-operated business, their logos are sufficient to mislead consumers. Let consumers believe that the e-commerce platform operator is self-operated, and consumers have the right to claim that the e-commerce platform operator assumes the responsibility of compensation as a food operator, so as to strengthen the protection of online food consumers.
Data map: Consumers are shopping for goods (the picture and text are irrelevant) Photo by Xi Jinyan
As long as there is no problem with the food, there is no need for punitive damages?
Judicial interpretation: No!
Article 148, paragraph 2 of the Food Safety Law stipulates that in addition to claiming compensation for losses, consumers can demand payment from the producer or business operator for producing food that does not meet food safety standards or operating food that does not meet food safety standards. Ten times the compensation or three times the loss; if the increase in compensation is less than one thousand yuan, one thousand yuan.
However, the labels and instructions of the food have defects that do not affect food safety and will not mislead consumers.
So, if the problematic food does not cause personal damage to consumers, is there no need to bear punitive damages?
In this regard, the "Interpretation" is clear: punitive damages are not premised on causing personal damage!
Article 10 of the "Interpretation" clarifies that food does not meet food safety standards. Consumers claim that producers or operators shall bear punitive damages in accordance with Article 148, paragraph 2 of the Food Safety Law. The people's court shall not support the defense on the grounds of personal injury.
What if the merchant promises to compensate the standard higher than the legal standard?
Judicial Interpretation: If you promise, you can't go wrong!
In real life, there are situations where the compensation standard promised by the business operator is higher than the legal compensation standard. Once the consumer finds that the food does not meet the food safety standard after purchasing it, the business operator refuses to fulfill the promise.
How to deal with this situation in the future?
In this regard, the "Interpretation" clarifies that the business operators know that the food does not meet the food safety standards, but the compensation standard promised to consumers is higher than the statutory compensation standard. If the consumer claims that the business operator pays in accordance with the promise, the people's court shall give it stand by.
By increasing the cost of untrustworthiness of operators, strengthening the sense of honesty of operators, and preventing operators from making random promises to interfere with consumers' consumption choices.
Data Map: Citizens select items in the supermarket (the image and text are irrelevant) Photo by Zhou Yi
Pre-packaged food may be fined if the production date is not marked!
Currently, many pre-packaged foods do not clearly indicate the production date and shelf life.
Regarding this issue, the "Interpretation" issued this time clarifies that the production and operation of prepackaged foods that do not clearly indicate the production date and shelf life, consumers claim that the producer or operator shall bear punitive measures in accordance with Article 148, paragraph 2 of the Food Safety Law The people's court shall support the compensation liability.
According to the regulations, if the packaging labels of prepackaged foods produced and operated do not indicate the production date and shelf life, or if the production date and shelf life are unclear, the producers and operators will be liable for punitive compensation.
Data map: Scan the QR code to order meals.
Photo by Zhang Yazi
Who is responsible for providing problem food on trains and airplanes?
In daily travel, who is responsible for consumers who eat problematic food on public transportation such as trains and airplanes?
The "Interpretation" released this time clarifies the main body responsible for food safety in public transportation.
Article 4 of the "Interpretation" stipulates that the food provided by the public transport carrier to passengers does not meet the food safety standards, and the passenger has the right to claim that the carrier shall bear the liability for compensation as a food producer or operator, and clarify whether it is provided for free or For paid provision, the carrier shall guarantee the safety of the food provided, and shall not make a defense on the grounds that the food is provided for free.
(Finish)