March 15th is the International Consumer Rights Day. The Supreme People's Court held a press conference and released ten typical cases of online consumption.
He Xiaorong, vice president of the Supreme People's Court, Chen Yifang, chief judge of the First Civil Division of the Supreme People's Court, and Gao Yanzhu, a second-level senior judge of the First Civil Division of the Supreme People's Court, attended the press conference and answered questions from reporters.
Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has attached great importance to expanding domestic demand, promoting consumption and developing the digital economy.
General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out when participating in the deliberations of the Jiangsu delegation at the First Session of the 14th National People's Congress, "It is necessary to meet the people's growing needs for a better life as the starting point and goal, to continuously transform development results into quality of life, and to continuously enhance the people's A sense of gain, happiness, and security." At the just-concluded First Session of the 14th National People's Congress and the First Session of the 14th CPPCC National Committee, many representatives and committee members attached great importance to online consumption and the protection of consumer rights, and suggested that consumption should be improved. environment, improve the quality of consumer services, and give priority to expanding consumption.
In order to conscientiously implement the spirit of the National Two Sessions and respond to the concerns of representatives, committee members and the general public on online consumption issues, we released typical cases of online consumption today to further protect the legitimate rights and interests of online consumers and promote the sustainable and healthy development of the digital economy.
Strengthening the judicial protection of consumers' rights and interests plays an important role in expanding domestic demand, promoting consumption, building a new development pattern, promoting high-quality economic development, and continuously satisfying the people's yearning for a better life.
In recent years, the Supreme People's Court has actively adapted to the new situation and requirements of consumer rights protection, increased the judicial protection of consumers' rights and interests, and actively created a legal environment conducive to consumption upgrading.
At present, with the vigorous development of my country's digital economy, online consumption has become one of the basic consumption methods of the public.
Online consumption disputes have also increased accordingly. In the past five years, people's courts at all levels across the country have concluded a total of 99,000 online shopping contract disputes and 23,000 online service contract disputes in the first instance.
Taking online shopping contract disputes as an example, 12,000 cases will be concluded in the first instance in 2018, and 32,000 cases will be concluded in 2022, nearly doubling the number of cases.
In addition to these two types of cases, there are also a large number of cases involving online consumption such as product liability, lease contracts, and travel contracts.
The Supreme People's Court attaches great importance to the application of law in the field of online consumption.
In March 2022, the "Regulations on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Online Consumer Dispute Cases (1)" was formulated and promulgated, responding to issues of common concern to the masses, such as online live broadcast marketing, takeaway catering, etc.
The ten typical cases of online consumption released this time are selected from hundreds of cases submitted by courts across the country, involving negative content to suppress the validity of contracts, consumer personal information protection, online recharge for minors, online travel booking services, and free orders for a limited time Issues such as sales promotion, second-hand commodity trading, online leasing, responsibility of platform operators, online food safety, validity of standard clauses, etc.
These ten cases mainly have the following three characteristics.
The first is to continue to optimize the online consumption environment and continuously increase the protection of consumers' rights and interests.
The case of Peng Moumou v. an e-commerce Co., Ltd. over an online shopping contract dispute clarifies that online food operators who sell pre-packaged foods without production dates shall be liable for punitive compensation in order to implement the "four most stringent" requirements and guide business operations. Those who control the market access and standardize the order of online food transactions.
At present, online rewards and online recharge behaviors of minors occur from time to time.
In the case of Zhang Moumou v. a Digital Technology Co., Ltd. over a dispute over an online sales contract, if it is determined that a minor has recharged an online game beyond his or her age and intelligence level, the guardian can recover the recharge amount according to law, effectively safeguard the legal rights and interests of the minor, and serve the minor Adults grow up healthy and create a good cyberspace and rule of law environment.
These cases have exemplary significance for guiding the people's courts to actively play their judicial functions, safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, and create a healthy and safe consumption environment.
The second is to guide e-commerce entities to standardize their operations and promote the sustainable and healthy development of the digital economy.
A cultural communication company sued an information technology company for a dispute over a network service contract. It was determined that algorithmic techniques and other means were used to improperly interfere with the ranking of search results in order to realize the "negative content suppression" contract clauses that were positive in front and negative in the back. Consumers' right to know and public order in cyberspace.
In the case of Zhang v. Zhou and a shopping platform information network sales contract dispute, it was determined that the agreed conditions for exempting orders within a limited time were fulfilled, and the operator should exempt orders in accordance with the agreement, which is conducive to further regulating online promotional activities.
The case of online shopping contract dispute between Zhang and Wu refers to the phenomenon of overlord clauses in online consumption, and it is clearly determined that the standard clauses of "the transaction is completed and does not support after-sales rights protection" are invalid.
These cases have clarified the value orientation through case-by-case judgments, demonstrating the important role of the judiciary in guiding market players to regulate honest operations, maintaining a fair and orderly market competition order, and promoting the healthy development of the digital economy.
The third is to clarify the boundaries of the exercise of rights and the scope of responsibilities, and further play the leading role of judicial judgments.
In the case of Zhang and others suing a merchant for online tort liability disputes, it was determined that the merchant's unauthorized disclosure of consumers' personal information due to negative reviews constituted infringement, which clarified the boundaries of the operator's behavior and effectively safeguarded the rights and interests of consumers' personal information.
Consumers book hotel services through online travel platforms, which may involve multiple links such as middlemen, and the legal relationship is complicated.
In the case of Xiong Mou et al. v. a travel agency over a network service contract dispute, the People’s Court held that the hotel reservation service provider should perform the contractual obligations such as assisting in unsubscribing, and those who failed to perform the obligations should bear the liability for breach of contract, safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of tourism consumers .
These cases have important regulatory significance and guiding value for further clarifying the legal relationship of online consumption, clarifying rights, obligations and responsibilities.
2023 is the first year to fully implement the spirit of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, and it is also the key year to implement the "14th Five-Year Plan".
The start is related to the overall situation, and the start determines the future.
Judicial protection of consumer rights is related to people's well-being and economic and social development, and there is a long way to go.
The people's court will be guided by Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, thoroughly implement Xi Jinping Thought on the Rule of Law, fully implement the spirit of the First Session of the Fourteenth National People's Congress and the First Session of the Fourteenth National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, and further play the role of judicial functions to protect consumers. Provide more powerful judicial services and guarantees for legitimate rights and interests, escorting high-quality economic development!
Typical cases of online consumption
Table of contents
Case 1: The "negative content suppression" agreement for improperly interfering with search results is invalid - A cultural communication company sued an information technology company for a dispute over a network service contract
Case 2: A merchant’s unauthorized publication of consumers’ personal information due to “bad reviews” constitutes an infringement——A case of Zhang and others suing a merchant for an online tort liability dispute
Case 3: When a minor purchases a game point card beyond his or her age and intelligence level, the guardian can recover the recharge amount in accordance with the law——Zhang Moumou v. A Digital Technology Co., Ltd. online sales contract dispute case
Case 4: The provider of online hotel reservation service should fulfill the contractual obligations such as assisting in unsubscribing——Xiong et al. v. a travel agency for a dispute over a network service contract
Case 5: The time-limited order exemption clause fulfills the agreed conditions, and the operator should exempt the order in accordance with the agreement——A case of dispute between Zhang and Zhou and a shopping platform information network sales contract
Case 6: The continuous sale of second-hand goods for the purpose of profit shall bear the responsibility of the operator - Wang v. Chen online shopping contract dispute case
Case 7: An e-commerce operator who sells pre-packaged food without a production date shall be liable for punitive damages——Peng Moumou v. An e-commerce Co., Ltd. online shopping contract dispute case
Case 8: Joint and several liability for food delivery platform failing to review the qualifications of catering service providers—the product liability dispute case between Wang and Company A
Case 9: An online car rental company failed to take out the three-liability insurance in full amount as promised, and should be liable for compensation for consumer losses within the scope of the insufficiency—a dispute over a vehicle leasing contract between Yang and a car rental company
Case 10: The overlord clause "does not support after-sales rights protection" is invalid - a case of online shopping contract dispute between Zhang and Wu
Case 1
"Negative Content Suppression" Covenant Inappropriately Interfering With Search Results Is Invalid
——A cultural communication company sued an information technology company for a dispute over a network service contract
【Basic case】
The plaintiff, a cultural communication company, provided search engine optimization and online communication services for a new energy battery brand.
An information technology company of the defendant and the plaintiff have a cooperative relationship. The two parties signed the "Entrustment Contract" in November 2020. The appendix of the "Entrustment Contract" specifically lists the various services that the defendant should provide.
Among them, the "negative suppression" clause in the "soft text optimization" service item stipulates that: the defendant optimizes the search engine of keywords designated by a certain new energy battery brand, and realizes that the first five pages of a search engine have no obvious negative content about the brand, and negative The pressing period is 30 days etc.
Later, the plaintiff sued for termination of the contract on the grounds that the defendant failed to complete the negative suppression service as agreed.
[referee result]
The trial court held that whether the agreement to provide online "negative suppression" services is valid should be determined in accordance with the law in light of the purpose of the contract, the way of behavior, and social harm.
From the perspective of the purpose of the contract, the purpose of negative suppression violates the principle of good faith; from the perspective of performance, the essence of negative suppression is to cover up some information that the public could have obtained, affecting the public's objective and comprehensive cognition of things; from the perspective of behavioral harm , Negative repressive behavior damages consumer rights and market competition order, harms social public interests, and violates public order and good customs; From the perspective of social effects, negative repressive behavior disrupts the order of Internet space management and affects the orderly development of Internet public space.
To sum up, the "negative suppression" clause in litigation is illegal. According to Article 143 of the "General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China" (implemented in 2017), the Supreme People's Court The provisions of Article 1 of the Several Provisions shall be deemed invalid.
【Typical meaning】
In the Internet age, search engines are important traffic sources and traffic distribution channels, and the ranking of search results is the core part of search engines.
The "negative content suppression" service is for profit, and artificially interferes with the ranking of search results through algorithm technology and other means to achieve positive front and negative rear, which seriously affects consumers' normal, objective and comprehensive access to information, and infringes consumers' right to know , disrupting the order of fair and orderly market competition, shall be deemed invalid according to law.
The judgment in this case has positive significance for safeguarding the right of online consumers to know and public order in the Internet space.
Case 2
Merchants publish consumers' personal information without authorization due to "bad reviews", which constitutes infringement
—— Zhang and others sued a merchant for a dispute over network tort liability
【Basic case】
The plaintiff, Zhang, and others were dissatisfied with the defendant's "script-killing" game service, and posted "bad reviews" on the Internet. The merchant then published the WeChat group chat records with Zhang and others, and the surveillance video footage of the game box on the WeChat official account. , WeChat personal account information, and also claimed that "the whole process of surveillance video can be provided to the public."
Zhang and others believed that the merchant's above-mentioned behavior violated his privacy and personal information rights and interests, and sued the merchant to stop the infringement, make an apology, and compensate for mental losses.
[referee result]
The trial court held that the activities of consumers in the private rooms provided by the operators are private. In order to clarify the "bad reviews", the merchants released the surveillance video in the consumer's private room through the WeChat public account and said that they could provide the whole process of video, which constituted a violation of the consumer's right to privacy. The merchant published its WeChat personal account information without the consent of Zhang and others, infringing on the personal information rights of Zhang and others.
In accordance with Articles 1032, 1033, and 1034 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, Articles 4 and 10 of the Personal Information Protection Law of the People's Republic of China Article 3 stipulates that the business shall be ordered to immediately stop disclosing the surveillance video, delete the expression "the whole process of surveillance video can be provided to the public" in the official account article and the WeChat personal account information of Zhang and others, issue an apology statement on the WeChat official account, and send a statement to Zhang. A certain class of people compensated for mental damage solatium.
【Typical meaning】
The role of the evaluation mechanism in the field of online consumption is becoming more and more obvious, and the right of consumers to put forward critical opinions should be protected.
Operators are obliged to protect the personal information of consumers obtained through the provision of goods or services. Operators should be careful not to infringe consumers' privacy rights and personal information rights when publicly responding to consumers' "bad reviews".
The judgment in this case clarified the behavior boundaries of operators when clarifying consumers' "bad reviews", safeguarded the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, and provided judicial protection for the orderly operation of the online consumer credit evaluation mechanism.
Case 3
Minors purchase game cards beyond their age and intelligence level
The guardian can recover the recharge according to law
—— Zhang Moumou v. A Digital Technology Co., Ltd. online sales contract dispute case
【Basic case】
Plaintiff Zhang Moumou's daughter, Zhang Xiaomou, was born in 2011 and is a fifth-grade primary school student.
On the evening of April 19, 2022, without the plaintiff's knowledge, Zhang Xiaomou used the plaintiff's mobile phone through a live broadcast platform, and under the inducement of the anchor, paid through the plaintiff's Alipay account to the defendant "a point card franchise" operated by a digital technology company. Store" 5949.87 yuan, used to purchase game recharge point cards, a total of 4 transactions.
The four transaction records occurred from 21:07:53 on April 19, 2022 to 21:30:00 on April 19, 2022.
The plaintiff believes that Zhang Xiaomou, as a person with limited capacity for civil conduct, used the plaintiff’s mobile phone to buy game recharge point cards from the defendant in about half an hour, reaching 5,949.87 yuan, and recharged to other game point card network operators within a similar period of the day. The consumption of more than 100,000 yuan, such as online live streaming and rewards, was obviously beyond the appropriate range for his age and intelligence, and the defendant should return it, so he appealed to the court to request the defendant to return the top-up money of 5,949.87 yuan.
[referee result]
The trial court held that: civil juristic acts performed by persons with limited capacity for civil conduct purely for profit or civil juristic acts commensurate with their age, intelligence, and mental status are valid; other civil juristic acts performed by persons with limited capacity for civil conduct are valid only after they are approved or ratified by their legal representatives.
In this case, Zhang Xiaomou, the daughter of the plaintiff Zhang Moumou, is a person with limited capacity for civil conduct. Zhang Xiaomou paid 5949.87 yuan in total to the point card franchise store operated by the defendant in four times using her father’s Alipay account. This behavior is obviously beyond her age. , the degree of intelligence is appropriate, now that the plaintiff does not ratify Zhang Xiaomou's behavior, the defendant should return the money to the plaintiff.
According to Article 19, Article 23, Article 27, and Article 145 of the "Civil Code of the People's Republic of China", the defendant is ordered to return the recharge fee of 5949.87 yuan to the plaintiff.
【Typical meaning】
At present, with the popularization of the Internet, minors' online behaviors become routine, and minors' online rewards and online recharge behaviors occur from time to time.
The judgment of this case, combined with the plaintiff’s daughter’s other recharge behaviors in a similar period of time, determined that the recharge behavior involved in the case was obviously beyond the appropriate level for her age and intelligence, and the defendant should return the recharge money to protect the legitimate rights and interests of minors in accordance with the law. The healthy growth of minors creates a favorable environment for cyberspace and the rule of law.
Case 4
Providers who provide online hotel booking services shall implement assistance in unsubscribing
other contractual obligations
——Xiong and others v. a travel agency for a dispute over a network service contract
【Basic case】
The plaintiff, Xiong, booked the "air ticket + hotel" free travel product from the defendant's travel agency through a travel app.
Two days before the trip, the plaintiff's son was unable to travel due to illness, so the plaintiff applied to the defendant to cancel the subscription.
The defendant contacted its intermediate supplier about the hotel product, and the intermediate supplier reported that "need to deduct 200 yuan per room per night and a total liquidated damages of 800 yuan, apply and do not guarantee the result".
However, the defendant did not inform the plaintiff of the hotel's cancellation policy, nor continued to ask the supplier to cancel the order, but informed the plaintiff that the order could not be cancelled, and the full room fee would be charged if the hotel did not actually check in.
After Xiong did not actually travel, he appealed to the court.
During the trial, after calling the hotel customer service number in court, it was confirmed that the cancellation policy of the order involved in the case was "If you cancel by yourself, you will be deducted a liquidated damages of 200 yuan per room per night. If you provide relevant disease certificates, you can cancel without damage except for holidays."
[referee result]
The trial court held that the two parties in this case had a network service contract relationship, and the main content of the service provided by the defendant was to book the designated hotel on behalf of the plaintiff through corresponding channels, so that the plaintiff and the hotel could successfully establish an accommodation service contract relationship.
In view of the particularity of the performance of the service contract involved, the reservation and other matters are not determined by the plaintiff directly communicating with the corresponding product provider. Therefore, when the plaintiff needs to cancel the reservation due to illness of a companion, the defendant should be considered legally responsible for assisting the plaintiff to apply to the hotel in a timely manner. Cancellation of orders, application for refunds and other contractual obligations, not once the booking is successful, all obligations are deemed to have been fulfilled.
In this case, the reservation of the hotel involved in the case can be canceled in fact, and the maximum penalty for breach of contract is 800 yuan, but the defendant did not truthfully inform the plaintiff of this situation. If the plaintiff's losses are caused by the performance of the accompanying obligations, the defendant shall compensate.
【Typical meaning】
In real life, it is very common for people to book hotels and other services through online travel platforms.
Online booking service providers connect with various service providers or suppliers upstream, and connect with consumers downstream. There are often multiple links involved in the middle, which easily breeds moral hazards that infringe on the rights and interests of consumers.
The judgment in this case determined that the provider of online hotel reservation service should fulfill the contractual obligations such as assisting in unsubscribing, so as to prevent the rights and interests of consumers from being improperly impaired, which is conducive to promoting the healthy development of the business model of online travel platforms.
Case 5
If the conditions stipulated in the time-limited exemption clause are fulfilled, the operator shall exempt the order according to the contract
——A dispute case between Zhang and Zhou and a shopping platform information network sales contract
【Basic case】
The defendant Zhou carried out the "Double 12" time-limited order free activity in the process of operating an online store, and formulated and publicized the relevant rules. The plaintiff Zhang participated in the time-limited order free activity when purchasing products.
Before participating in the event, Zhang consulted the store customer service about the order-free rules, which are enjoyed by those who pay first.
However, in the case that Zhang made the payment first, Zhou did not exempt Zhang from the order according to the rules. Zhang believed that Zhou constituted a breach of contract, and appealed to Zhou to refund the payment he had made.
[referee result]
The trial court held that, according to Articles 14, 60, and 44 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China (implemented in 1999), and Article 49 of the Electronic Commerce Law of the People's Republic of China, the parties concerned The time-limited waiver agreement is a contract clause with conditional performance of obligations. If the consumer meets the requirements of the waiver rules, the operator should perform the waiver obligation, otherwise it constitutes a breach of contract.
The rules that Zhang learned from consulting customer service before participating in the event should be regarded as the rules of the event, and both parties should abide by it.
Zhang made the payment first, and Zhou did not waive the order for Zhang in accordance with the waiver rules, which constituted a breach of contract. Zhang's request for Zhou to refund the payment is based on legal evidence and should be supported.
【Typical meaning】
With the vigorous development of e-commerce, various forms of promotion means emerge in endlessly.
These promotional activities have enlivened the market and stimulated consumption, but at the same time, they have also brought about some problems that damage the rights and interests of consumers.
The judgment of this case further clarified the legal nature of the activity rules formulated by e-commerce operators for various promotional activities such as free orders and discounts, and guided operators to operate in good faith in accordance with the law and effectively protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
Case 6
The continuous sale of second-hand goods for the purpose of profit shall bear the responsibility of the operator
—— Wang Mou v. Chen Mou online shopping contract dispute case
【Basic case】
In September 2019, the plaintiff Wang X placed an order for a laptop computer of a certain brand on a second-hand trading platform for the purpose of studying. After receiving the goods, the computer was found to be severely worn and could not be charged normally. The official after-sales inspection found that the internal battery of the computer was bulging, there were unofficial modifications and non-original parts, which were obviously inconsistent with the 95% new that Chen advertised. Wang contacted Chen to return the product and was refused a refund.
Wang believed that Chen constituted a fraud, and sued the court to ask Chen to refund and pay three times the price.
Chen argued that his handling of second-hand items for his own use on the second-hand platform does not belong to the operators stipulated in the Consumer Rights Protection Law.
[referee result]
The trial court held that before the establishment of this contract, Chen sold a certain brand of computers and other electronic equipment through his second-hand platform account many times. The intention of continuing to sell goods externally for profit, so Chen has the identity of an e-commerce operator.
According to the contact information between the two parties, the two parties took the computer involved as a genuine computer as the premise of the transaction, and the solid-state hard drive inside the computer involved in the case was inspected for non-original components, and the equipment had unofficial dismantling and modification traces, that is, the computer involved in the case was not a genuine second-hand computer.
The defendant constituted fraud and should bear the liability for punitive compensation. According to the provisions of Article 55 of the "Consumer Rights Protection Law of the People's Republic of China", Chen was ordered to refund and pay three times the payment for the goods.
【Typical meaning】
The transaction mode of idle goods is a typical mode in the digital economy.
The emergence of second-hand goods trading platforms is conducive to the revitalization and reuse of idle goods.
But in reality, some people operate in the name of trading idle items on the second-hand trading platform, and refuse to bear the responsibility of the operator on the grounds that they are trading idle items for their own use when there is a problem with the goods.
The judgment in this case comprehensively considers the nature, source, quantity, price, frequency, income, etc. of the goods sold by the seller, and finds that the seller who continues to sell second-hand goods for the purpose of profit should bear the responsibility of the operator, which is conducive to better safeguarding the legality of consumers. It has reference significance for the handling of similar cases.
Case 7
E-commerce operators who sell pre-packaged foods without production dates shall be liable for punitive damages
——Peng Moumou v. An E-Commerce Co., Ltd. Online Shopping Contract Dispute Case
【Basic case】
The plaintiff, Peng Moumou, purchased 4 copies of "XX Stress Slimming Candies" (2 boxes of 60 capsules each) at an online store opened by an e-commerce company of the defendant. Arrived goods.
After receiving the above-mentioned goods and eating some of them, Peng Moumou found that although it was marked on the packaging box of the goods: the shelf life is 24 months; the manufacturer is a slimming Co., Ltd.; the production address is No. XXX, XX District, XX City, XX Province; the production date is printed on the code , but there is no coding mark of the relevant production date on the product packaging, and no relevant information about the manufacturer has been found.
Peng Moumou sued the court on the grounds that an e-commerce company sold food that did not meet the food safety standards, demanding that the e-commerce company return the purchase price of 1475.60 yuan and pay punitive damages ten times the purchase price.
[referee result]
The trial court held that an e-commerce company, as a food operator, sold "XX pressure slimming candy" on the e-commerce platform without a production date mark and a fictitious manufacturer, which fell under Article 148 of the Food Safety Law of the People's Republic of China. According to the situation of "production of food that does not meet food safety standards or operation of food that does not meet food safety standards" stipulated in Article 1 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Food Safety Civil Dispute Cases (1)", Article 11 stipulates that it should bear the responsibility of punitive compensation, and judged that an e-commerce company should return Peng’s payment of 1,475.60 yuan and pay ten times the amount of the payment in compensation of 14,756 yuan.
【Typical meaning】
At present, it is very common for the public to buy food through the Internet. At the same time, for consumers, online food has certain potential risks due to the virtualization of the trading environment.
The lack of production date information on the packaging labels of pre-packaged foods prevents consumers from making judgments on food safety, and there are major hidden dangers of harming consumers' health and life safety.
The judgment in this case determined that e-commerce operators who sell pre-packaged foods without production dates should bear the liability for punitive compensation, compacting the main responsibility of food operators, and further regulating the order of online food transactions.
Case 8
Food delivery platforms that fail to review the qualifications of catering service providers should bear joint and several liabilities
——A product liability dispute case between Wang and Company A
【Basic case】
Defendant A Company operates a takeaway catering platform, provides takeaway ordering services, and solemnly promises to consumers: Our platform has conducted strict on-site inspections of the food business licenses of online catering service providers, and guaranteed that the online catering service providers’ food business The license information such as the name of the operator, business place, main business type, business items, and validity period stated in the license is legal, true, accurate, and valid.
The plaintiff, Wang, purchased a Malatang from a Malatang store on the platform, and later found that the Malatang store had not obtained a food business license.
Wang sued the court, requiring Company A and the Mala Tang shop to bear joint and several liability for compensation.
[referee result]
The trial court held that: the food delivery platform operated by Company A is a third-party platform for online transactions. The food business operator registered with his real name and checked whether he had obtained a food business license, but Company A failed to fulfill the above obligations, so that Wang bought food made by a business without food business qualifications, and his legitimate rights and interests were damaged. Company A should contact the food business operator shall be jointly and severally liable for compensation.
【Typical meaning】
在数字经济背景下，互联网平台应当依法履行主体责任，尤其是涉及消费者身体健康的外卖餐饮平台，更应加强对平台内餐饮服务提供者身份及经营许可资质的审核。本案裁判明确外卖餐饮平台经营者未依法尽到资质审核义务，导致消费者合法权益受损的，应承担连带赔偿责任，确保人民群众的身体健康和生命安全不受非法侵害。
案例9
在线租车公司未按照承诺足额投保三责险，应在不足范围内对消费者损失承担赔偿责任
——杨某与某租车公司车辆租赁合同纠纷案
【基本案情】
原告杨某通过某租车APP向被告某租车公司承租一辆小型客车，并按约享受“尊享服务”，租期4天。某租车公司为该租车APP的运营者。租车APP中说明：“在您购买尊享服务后，无需承担保险理赔范围内的损失以及保险理赔范围外的轮胎损失。”某租车公司在保险责任中承诺商业第三者责任险保险金额为200000元，但实际仅投保50000元。后杨某驾驶租赁车辆发生交通事故，造成他人财产损失。因商业第三者责任险投保不足，扣除通过保险获赔金额后，杨某被判赔偿案外人428000元。后杨某诉至法院，请求某租车公司支付其事故赔偿428000元等。
【裁判结果】
审理法院认为，某租车公司承诺投保商业第三者责任险保险金额200000元，尊享服务说明承租人无需承担保险理赔范围内的损失，但本案中杨某发生交通事故后保险公司赔付的商业第三者责任险保险金仅50000元，差额部分150000元属于杨某本可以通过商业保险避免的损失，该损失应由被告承担。依据《中华人民共和国合同法》(1999年施行)第一百零七条规定，判决被告某租车公司赔偿原告杨某150000元。
【典型意义】
网络租车平台是数字化赋能的典型商业模式。实际经营中，存在经营者为规避风险、提高利润，违背向租车人作出的承诺，为出租的汽车投保保险金额较低的商业保险的情况。本案裁判通过认定在线租赁公司承担投保不足导致的赔偿责任，树立正确的价值导向，引导在线租赁公司诚信经营，保障租车消费者的合法权益。
案例10
“不支持售后维权”的霸王条款无效
—— Zhang and Wu online shopping contract dispute case
【Basic case】
In December 2020, the plaintiff Zhang bought a second-hand women's bag of a certain brand from Wu on an online trading platform for 14,000 yuan.
Later, Zhang entrusted a testing agency to conduct a test and found that the bag was not authentic, so he sent the bag back to Wu. Zhang's request for a refund was unsuccessful, and he sued the court for a full refund.
Defendant Wu stated that he was specialized in luxury business transactions and had conducted many transactions with the plaintiff, and argued that the transactions were cash on delivery, and the buyer's payment showed that he had recognized the quality of the goods, and the platform's "User Code of Conduct" clearly stated: " After the transaction is successful, after-sale rights protection is not supported, so returns and refunds are not agreed.
[referee result]
The trial court held that the content of the platform's "User Behavior Code" about "the transaction is completed and does not support after-sales rights protection" is a clause that was pre-drawn by e-commerce operators for repeated use and was not negotiated with the other party when signing the contract. It is a standard clause.
This standard clause unreasonably exempts the liability of the operator and excludes the rights of consumers. According to the provisions of Article 1 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Online Consumer Dispute Cases (1), it should be deemed invalid.
【Typical meaning】
In practice, there are situations where e-commerce operators take advantage of their dominant position to formulate unfair and unreasonable standard terms that infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
The referee in this case reviewed the legality of standard terms for online consumption, and made a negative evaluation of standard terms that unreasonably exempt operators from liability and exclude consumers' rights, effectively safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of consumers and a healthy and clear consumption environment.
(Official WeChat of the Supreme Court)