All food, in the future to buy problem food to be so rights!

Original title: "All food, in the future to buy problem food to be so rights!
the end of the year, many eaters are ready to hoard again! But in the process of consumption, we are inevitably "stepping on the thunder".
you make a claim for buying fake and inferior food? Who is responsible for misleading consumers on e-commerce platforms? Prepackaged food can not find the date of production how to deal with? On the 9th, the Supreme Law issued a judicial interpretation on the trial of civil disputes over food safety, giving a clear answer to a series of questions encountered by consumers in their lives.
e-commerce platform does not register food operators by real name?
or assume eso interse/a rights issue!
statistics show that between 2017 and the first half of 2020, there were 49,000 new online shopping contract disputes in people's courts at all levels, of which about 30% involved e-commerce platform liability, while food disputes accounted for nearly half of online shopping contract disputes, accounting for 45.65 percent.
for consumers, network food hidden a certain risk, if the online food operator qualifications, credibility can not be guaranteed, it is easy to cause food safety problems.
the judicial interpretation issued this time on the issue of online food sales to be clear.
The Interpretation stipulates that e-commerce platform operators do not register and review the real name of food operators in the platform in accordance with the law, or fail to fulfill their obligations such as reporting and stopping the provision of online trading platform services in accordance with the law, so that the legitimate rights and interests of consumers are harmed, consumers have the right to claim that e-commerce platform operators and food operators within the platform bear a shared responsibility, so that the e-commerce platform for consumers to put good food safety clearance.
e-commerce platform label "self-employed" sales of problem food?
judicial interpretation: the platform also has to take responsibility!
do you prefer the "self-employed" label in the online shopping process?
In accordance with the above-mentioned Interpretation, if the e-commerce platform operator does not meet the food safety standards by marking the food sold by the self-employed business mode or the food sold by the self-employed but actually carrying out the self-employed business, the consumer shall have the right to claim the liability of the e-commerce platform operator as a food operator.
At the same time, in view of the existence of e-commerce platform in practice, such as the identification of misleading consumers, the "Explanation" provides that although the e-commerce platform operators do not actually carry out self-employed business, but its logo is sufficient to mislead consumers, so that consumers believe that the e-commerce platform operators self-employed, consumers have the right to claim that e-commerce platform operators bear the liability as food operators, in order to strengthen the protection of online food consumers.
food, as long as it doesn't go wrong, there's no punitive compensation?
judicial interpretation: No!
article 148, paragraph 2, of the Food Safety Law stipulates that in the case of food products that do not meet food safety standards or that are knowingly not in line with food safety standards, consumers may, in addition to seeking compensation for losses, also demand compensation from producers or operators for compensation ten times the price or three times the loss; However, food labels and instructions have defects that do not affect food safety and do not mislead consumers.
, the problem food did not cause personal injury to consumers, do not have to bear punitive damages?
, the Interpretation makes it clear that punitive damages are not premised on personal injury!
Article 10 of the Interpretation makes it clear that food does not meet food safety standards, and the people's court shall not support the consumer's claim that the producer or operator shall bear punitive liability in accordance with the provisions of Article 148, paragraph 2, of the Food Safety Law, and that the producer or operator shall not defend it on the ground that it has not caused personal injury to the consumer.
merchants promise compensation standards higher than the statutory standards how to pay compensation?
judicial interpretation: commitment, can not rely on the account!
real life, there is a situation where the compensation standard promised by the operator is higher than the statutory compensation standard, once the consumer buys the food and finds that the food does not meet the food safety standard, the request to fulfill the promise is rejected by the operator.
to deal with this situation in the future?
to this, the Interpretation makes it clear that if the operator operates food that is knowingly not in line with food safety standards, but the standard of compensation promised to the consumer is higher than the legal compensation standard, and the consumer claims that the operator shall pay compensation in accordance with the commitment, the people's court shall support it in accordance with the law. By raising the cost of operators' loss of trust, strengthening the operators' sense of good faith, and putting an end to the situation in which operators' promised interference with consumers' consumption choices occurs.
prepackaged food may be fined if it does not mark a production date!
, many prepackaged foods do not clearly indicate the date of production and shelf life.
For this issue, the "Explanation" issued this time makes it clear that if the production and operation of prepackaged food products that do not clearly indicate the date and shelf life of production, the people's court shall support the producer or operator's claim that the producer or operator shall bear punitive liability in accordance with the provisions of Article 148, paragraph 2, of the Food Safety Law.
According to this provision, the production operator shall be liable for punitive liability if the packaging label of the prepackaged food produced and operated does not indicate the date of production, the shelf life, or the date of production or shelf life is not clear.
be responsible for providing problem food on trains and planes?
who will be responsible for the daily travel, when consumers eat problem food on public transport such as trains and planes?
"Explanation" issued by the Government of China clearly identifies the main body responsible for food safety in public transportation.
Article 4 of the Interpretation provides that the food provided to the passenger by the carrier of public transport does not meet food safety standards and that the passenger has the right to claim the carrier's liability as a food producer or operator, and to make it clear that whether it is provided free of charge or paid, the carrier shall guarantee the safety of the food provided and shall not defend it on the ground that the food is provided free of charge. (Complete)