The Supreme Law promulgated the "Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Food and Drug Disputes". Provisions: celebrity endorsement of false advertising to bear responsibility; gifts infringing merchants must bear responsibility; online trading platform knows that infringement is not a responsibility “sit”. The purpose of this judicial interpretation is to increase the protection of consumers' rights and interests and to harmonize the scale of judicial decisions in cases of food and drug disputes. The judicial interpretation will be implemented on March 15th.

Celebrity endorsements

Celebrity endorsement false advertising with responsibility

[Judicial Interpretation Provisions] Social organizations or other organizations or individuals recommend foods and medicines to consumers in false advertising, and cause consumers to suffer damages. Consumers request foods and medicines according to relevant laws and regulations such as the Consumer Protection Law. Where producers and sellers are jointly and severally liable, the people’s court shall support it.

[Background] celebrity endorsement of whether false advertising should bear responsibility has been widely concerned about the society. In October 2013, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress voted on the decision to amend the Consumer Protection Law. After the amendment, the law clearly stipulated the responsibility of the false advertising spokesperson. The judicial interpretation issued this time further clarified this.

[Interpretation] The Supreme Law Spokesman Sun Jungong stated that according to the Consumer Protection Law and the Tort Liability Act, the "Regulations" are jointly and severally liable, and consumers can both sue food and drug manufacturers, sellers, and advertising agencies. The advertiser, the advertising publisher, and the advertising spokesperson request that they jointly bear the liability for compensation. They may also sue one or several of them as defendants, who shall bear the full liability for compensation, and then exercise the right of recourse against other responsible parties.

Gift Infringement

Gifts have quality problems merchants should be compensated

[Judicial Interpretation Provisions] Food, pharmaceutical producers, sellers give quality food safety problems to consumers or consumers, consumers are injured, consumers claim rights, and producers and sellers do not pay for gifts. The court will not support the consideration of the exemption defence.

[Interpretation] Sun Jungong explained that food and medicines are related to the personal safety of consumers. Even if they are gifts, they must also ensure quality and safety. The cost of gifts has actually been allocated to paid products. In the case of food or drugs donated due to quality problems that cause damage to consumers’ rights and interests, producers and sellers should also bear the liability for compensation.

Considering that consumers are given food and medicines in essence are merchants' profit-making nature, they have limited the conditions for producers and sellers to bear responsibility. That is, the gifts must have quality and safety problems, causing consumer damage. Can claim rights.

Overlord Terms

"Overlord Terms" content can be considered invalid

[Judicial Interpretation Provisions] Producers and sellers of foods and medicines use format contracts, notices, statements, notices, etc. to exclude or limit the rights of consumers, and to reduce or exempt operators from responsibility and aggravate consumer responsibilities are unfair to consumers. , Unreasonable provisions, consumers request in court to determine that the content is invalid, the court should support.

[Background] In reality, some producers and sellers of foods and medicines use unfair and unreasonable regulations on consumers under the “Overlord Clause” to damage the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.

[Interpretation] Sun Jungong believes that consumers are often at a disadvantage compared with the operators of food and medicine. The “Regulations” have been detailed in compliance with the relevant provisions of the Consumer Protection Law, and consumers can request the People’s Court to determine that “Overlord Terms” is invalid.

Knowingly buying fake

"Learn to buy fake" does not affect the rights

[Judicial Interpretation Provisions] Because of disputes over the quality of foods and medicines, buyers claim rights from producers and sellers, and producers and sellers defend themselves against the fact that the purchaser knows that there are quality problems with food and medicines and they continue to purchase for reasons. The court does not support it.