I don’t know if the following can help you.
Case 1: On March 16 this year, Sun bought a box of Tianjin Fu* Food Technology Development Co., Ltd. in a supermarket in Hebei District operated by Tianjin Jinzhongle* Life Shopping Co., Ltd. A box of "five* mosaic" produced. The supermarket issued him a shopping receipt. After purchasing, Sun thought that there was something wrong with the name of the food. The special name reflecting the true attributes of the food was not clearly marked in a conspicuous position on the label. The label must be placed in a conspicuous position and clearly indicate the special name that reflects the true attributes of the food.” The supermarket committed fraud in providing the product, so the supermarket operator was sued to court.
The judge hearing this case believed that the product name provided by the defendant was not a special name that could clearly reflect its true attributes. The name "Mosaic" could indeed easily misunderstand the attributes of the product, and the defendant was not present in court. Responding to the lawsuit, he gave up his right to defend and failed to provide evidence to prove that his behavior was not fraud within the statutory time limit. Therefore, the defendant's behavior was an act of defrauding consumers and he should bear corresponding legal liability. The defendant should refund the purchase price to the plaintiff in accordance with legal provisions, and should also increase compensation for the losses suffered by the consumer as requested. Based on the above reasons, the court ordered the defendant to refund the plaintiff's purchase price of 10.90 yuan and pay compensation of 500 yuan.
Case 2: A few days ago, Mr. Zhan went to the supermarket to buy a variety of ingredients. However, halfway through the cooking, he noticed that there was something wrong with the boxes of pig blood he purchased. “First of all, from the appearance, There was something wrong with the pig blood in those boxes. There was a lot of water. Secondly, when I opened the plastic wrap and smelled it, I found a smell, which was obviously spoiled. Later, Mr. Zhan took the spoiled pig blood and went to the supermarket to ask the reason. However, What he didn't expect was that he had been waiting in the supermarket office area for a long time, and no one on the other side gave him a reasonable explanation. Yesterday, reporters came to the Darun* Supermarket on Longhai Road, Zijingshan Road, Zhengzhou City where Mr. Zhan bought spoiled pig blood. When asked about the situation, the staff of the service department of Darun* Supermarket explained that the pig blood has deteriorated, but it is not expired. As for the reason for the deterioration, it may be that some consumers are unwilling to buy it due to personal reasons after purchasing it. It is placed randomly in the corner of the supermarket, and the pig blood needs to be refrigerated. If the staff does not collect it in time, it is likely to deteriorate due to excessive temperature.
"No matter what, it must be there. It was our work error. We will strengthen patrols in the future to ensure that customers' unpaid goods are recovered in a timely manner. "Finally, a female person in charge of the service department of RT-Mart* Supermarket apologized to Mr. Zhan and said that he would immediately return the goods to Mr. Zhan. At the same time, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the "Food Safety Law", Mr. Zhan would be compensated ten times the price of the product. Mr. Zhan expressed satisfaction.
Case 3: On May 27 this year, Ms. Li, who lives in Tianning District, purchased "Beijing Grass Wine (Extreme Enjoyment)" from a trading company in Beijing through the Tmall website. The wine gift box. The six 100 ml small bottles are quite exquisite, and the outer packaging is also quite formal. After searching online according to the implementation standard GB/T27588 shown on the packaging, Ms. Li found that “prepackaged wine labels are implemented in accordance with GB10344 and marked. "Sugar content", but she took a magnifying glass and looked at the bottle several times, but could not find any instructions on the sugar content. A few days later, she sent the Cordyceps wine to the Changzhou Product Quality Supervision and Inspection Institute for inspection, and it was determined to be Unqualified goods. Taking the inspection report, she called the trading company and asked for a refund of ten in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Food Safety Law. After several negotiations with the trading company failed, Ms. Li filed a lawsuit with Tianning Court. The lawsuit was filed.
After hearing, the court held that the implementation standard stated on the wine package is GB/T27588, so it should be strictly implemented in accordance with the standard and the label does not indicate "sugar content", which is not in compliance with food safety. Standards. The court emphasized that as a food business operator, when selling food, you should not only review the qualification certificate of the food production enterprise and the quality certificate of the product, but also perform the necessary review obligations to see whether the food itself meets the food safety standards. Product labels belong to food As part of the safety standards, the trading company failed to provide evidence to prove that it fulfilled its obligation to review whether the label complied with food safety standards. Accordingly, the first instance judgment was made and the trading company refunded one price and compensated ten yuan.