(Reporter Zhang Lei) This morning, the Daxing Court investigated the cases involving food safety disputes that were handled from 2010 to 2014 and found that the vast majority of the defendants were food vendors such as shopping malls and supermarkets. There are many well-known large-scale supermarkets such as Wumart, Midea, Yonghui and Tesco.
According to statistics, Daxing Court accepted a total of 22 cases involving food safety from 2010 to 2014. Among them, there were 5 in 2010, 2 in 2011, 4 in 2012, 7 in 2013, and 14 in 2014, showing an overall increasing trend. All consumers require supermarkets and other retailers to return their purchases and pay 10 times the price according to the Food Safety Law.
The president of the Fourth Civil Division of Daxing Court, Kang Linfang, said that many consumers tend to purchase food at large supermarkets and shopping malls. However, Daxing Court's statistics on food safety cases found that Beijing Wumart supermarkets in the jurisdiction, Beijing Meilianmei Commercial Chain Co., Ltd., Beijing Yonghui Supermarket Co., Ltd., and Tesco Tesco Business (Beijing) Co., Ltd. have all become large-scale integrated supermarkets. The defendant in the relevant case.
Kang Linfang said, “The large-scale supermarkets have been shot in the food safety area, indicating that consumers can not fully place their food safety concerns on the seller’s consciousness no matter where they buy food.â€
Related cases 10% compensation for consumers who bought expired food
On February 28, 2014, the plaintiff Fan Mou bought 7 boxes of 60 eggs in the defendant supermarket. Among them, 1 box stated production date was January 27, 2014, and 6 boxes stated that the production date was January 2014. On the 29th, the shelf life was 30 days at room temperature.
On the same day, the plaintiff Fanmou went to Yizhuang Town, Daxing District, Beijing to report the sale of expired eggs in a supermarket.
The Daxing District Food and Drug Administration of Beijing Municipality filed the case on March 3, 2014, and confirmed that the supermarket of the defendant sold expired foods in violation of the provisions of Article 28(8) of the “PRC Food Safety Lawâ€, and According to Article 85(7) of the Food Safety Law of the People's Republic of China, an administrative penalty was imposed on a supermarket of the defendant.
On March 8, 2014, a certain supermarket of the defendant invoiced the plaintiff Fan. Since then, Fanmou sued the claim.
A certain supermarket of the defendant recognized the facts filed by the plaintiff Fan. At the same time, he believes that he is not interested in selling expired foods. The precondition for 10 times compensation is damage to consumers and he does not agree to compensation.
The court held that the defendant should not sell the food beyond the expiration date to the consumer, so the defendant had apparent fault in the sales action in this case.
On the other hand, the consumer claims that paying 10 times the price for the seller’s payment is not based on the actual damage to the consumer. Therefore, the court sentenced the defendant to refund the payment of 434 yuan and paid the plaintiff Fan a compensation of 4340 yuan.
Fire Extinguisher,Automatic Dcp Fire Extinguisher,Co2 Type Fire Extinguisher,Water Mist Extinguisher
NINGBO TOMAN IMP. & EXP. CO., LTD , https://www.tdotmfiresolution.com