Date: June 2006 12.
Venue: mock trial Civil Court of Harbin Engineering University.
Characters:
Presiding Judge: Zhou Wei
Judges: Yang Ping and Zhang Ziqi.
Clerk:
Plaintiff: Liu Xuejuan, female, 25 years old, a teacher of Nanjing TV University in Jiangsu Province, living in Xuri Garden, Xuanwu District, Nanjing.
Agent of the plaintiff:
Defendant: Zhejiang Hangzhou Lejin Cosmetics Co., Ltd., located in Hangzhou Economic and Technological Development Zone.
Legal Representative: Dai Zhenhua, chairman of the board of directors of this company.
Defendant: Suning Global Shopping Center in Nanjing, Jiangsu Province.
Legal Representative: Liu Xiaoyong, director of the center.
Authorized Agent: Yao Hai, male, lawyer of Hao Wei Law Firm in Ning 'an.
Cause of action: consumer rights protection dispute
Summary of the case: Plaintiff Liu Xuejuan filed a lawsuit with the People's Court of Gulou District, Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province for a consumer rights dispute with defendants Hangzhou Lejin Cosmetics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Lejin Company) and Suning Global Shopping Center (hereinafter referred to as Suning Center).
(1) court preparation stage)
Clerk:
(a) to check the appearance of the parties and their agents ad litem in court and invite them to sit down.
(2) The court discipline now declares:
1. All court personnel should obey the unified command of the judge, turn off all communication tools, observe the court order and forbid smoking.
2. The observers must keep quiet, do not make noise, applaud or interrupt, and do not enter the trial area. If you have any comments, you can put them forward after the recess.
3. The parties and their agents ad litem shall not leave the court halfway. If they leave the court without authorization, the plaintiff will drop the lawsuit. If it is the defendant, it will be judged by default according to law.
4. Judges or bailiffs have the right to stop acts that violate court discipline and hinder civil litigation activities. Those who don't listen to stop can be admonished, ordered to leave or fined or detained according to law; If the circumstances are serious, criminal responsibility shall be investigated according to law.
(3) Please ask the presiding judge to sit down.
(four) report that the judge and the parties have appeared in court, please hold a hearing.
Presiding Judge: Now the trial begins. First, check the identity of the parties. Plaintiff, your name, age, occupation and address? Is there an agent?
Plaintiff: My name is Liu Xuejuan, female, 25 years old, a student of Nanjing TV University in Jiangsu Province, and I live in Xuri Garden, Xuanwu District, Nanjing.
Agent of the plaintiff:
Presiding Judge: Defendant, what's your name, age, occupation and address? Is there an agent?
Defendant 1: My name is Dai Zhenhua, chairman of the company. Zhejiang Hangzhou Lejin Cosmetics Co., Ltd. Address: Hangzhou Economic and Technological Development Zone. Entrusted Yao Hai, a lawyer of Hao Wei Law Firm in this city, as the general agent.
Defendant's agent:
Defendant 2: My name is Liu Xiaoyong, and I am in charge of this center. Suning Global Shopping Center, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, Address: Hunan Road, Nanjing.
Presiding Judge: According to the provisions of Articles 142, 143 and 145 of the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the Civil Trial Chamber of Ning 'an People's Court today applied summary procedure to hear the case of the plaintiff Qin Liang and the defendant Zhang Jun's dispute over consumer rights protection. This case was tried by Sima Yan, the judge of our court, and Guo Feng, the clerk of our court, made a record. The court has informed the parties of their litigation rights and obligations in writing and will not repeat them. According to the provisions of Article 46 of the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), our court explains the right to withdraw the lawsuit. If a judge has the following three circumstances, which may affect the fair trial of a case, the parties have the right to apply for his withdrawal orally or in writing: 1, the parties to this case or the close relatives of the parties or agents ad litem; 2. Interested in the case; 3. Having other relations with the parties to the case, which may affect the fair trial of the case. Now ask the parties whether to apply for withdrawal?
Plaintiff: No application.
Defendant: No application.
(2) Court investigation stage)
Presiding Judge: We conduct a court fact investigation, and the plaintiff states the facts first.
Plaintiff: On June 26th, 2004, Appellant Liu Xuejuan bought a bottle of Haixi Blue O (superscript 2) Time Rejuvenating Liquid (suitable for skin rejuvenation) produced by Appellee Lejin Company in Suning Center, with a net content of 130ml and a price of 170 yuan. The bottom of the cosmetic outer packaging box is marked with "Limited use date: recorded on the bottom or side", and the bottom of the built-in glass container is marked with "Limited use qualified 2007.438+05438+0.438+0". I opened the bottle after I bought the cosmetics. Plaintiff bought Hercynian O (superscript 2) revitalizing water produced by defendant Lejin Company at defendant Suning Center. On the outer packaging of this cosmetic, there is no indication of the use period and correct use method after opening the bottle. The plaintiff bought such cosmetics, and it is difficult to use them correctly. Lejin Company did not correctly label cosmetics on the outer packaging, and Suning Center sold such cosmetics to consumers, which violated the plaintiff's right to know according to law. Defendant: 1. Mark the service life of the bottle mouth on the outer packaging of Hercynian O (superscript 2) light rejuvenation liquid, and provide the corresponding test report; 2. Explain and mark the method of correctly using goods or receiving services.
Presiding Judge: Next, the defendant will reply.
Defendant entrusts agent:
Presiding Judge: According to the statement of the original defendant, the focus of the dispute in this case is: 1. Does the "limited use date" marked on the cosmetic package in this case include the use period after opening the bottle? 2. Whether to mislead consumers to mark "restricted use date" on the cosmetics in this case; 3. In this case, whether LG's labeling method for cosmetics infringes consumers' right to know; 4. Should we support the idea that the outer package of Hercynian O (superscript 2) Time-Rejuvenating Liquid should be marked with the service life after opening the bottle? The two sides provided relevant evidence around this focus.
Plaintiff: Plaintiff Liu Xuejuan submitted the shopping invoice, the packing box of Hercynian O (superscript 2) Time Skin Rejuvenation Liquid and four photos to the court to prove the prosecution facts.
Presiding Judge: Does the defendant have any objection to the invoice?
Defendant: There is no objection to the authenticity and contents of the invoice provided by the plaintiff. Defendants LG Company and Suning Center have no objection to the shopping invoice submitted by plaintiff Liu Xuejuan, but think that the code on the box reflects that this box of Hailan O (superscript 2) Time Revitalizing Liquid is not sold by Suning Center.
The defendant Lejin Company submitted the trademark registration certificate, enterprise standard record number, production license, hygiene license, inspection report of Hangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention, packing box and instructions of Heleland O (superscript 2) rejuvenation liquid to the court, which proved that its approved production of Heleland O (superscript 2) rejuvenation liquid was qualified cosmetics, and explained the correct use of the cosmetics to consumers.
Defendant Suning Center submitted to the court the joint sales counter contract from June 5438+February 2003 to June 5438+February 2004, the packaging box and instructions of Hercynian O (superscript 2) revitalizing liquid, in order to prove its legal distribution of Hercynian O (superscript 2) revitalizing liquid.
Presiding judge: What is the plaintiff's opinion on the evidence provided by the defendant and the contents to be proved?
Plaintiff: Liu Xuejuan has no objection to the authenticity of the evidence submitted by LG and Suning Center.
Presiding judge:
Defendant:
Presiding judge: Do the defendant and the defendant have anything to add to the facts?
Plaintiff: No. ..
Defendant: No. ..
Presiding Judge: The parties have nothing to add to the facts, and the fact investigation is over. The following is the court debate around the focus of the dispute.
First, the plaintiff will speak in the debate.
Court debate stage)
Plaintiff: Article 64 of the Enterprise Standard of Hangzhou Lejin Cosmetics Co., Ltd. (Q3301KLOC-0/) of the appellee Lejin Company clearly stipulates: "The product meets the specified storage conditions, and the shelf life of the product is four years under the condition of intact packaging and unopened". Cosmetics come into contact with air after being opened. With the changes of temperature and environment, as well as the different usage habits and sanitary conditions of users, their effective components are easy to change, and the shelf life after being opened will be greatly shortened. On June 26th, 2004, the appellant Liu Xuejuan bought Haixilan O (superscript 2) Time Rejuvenation Liquid, and the "expiration date" marked on it was June 2007165438+1October 2nd1,which should mean that the product met the specified storage conditions, was well packaged and unopened. The first trial found that "this period should be regarded as the safe use period before or after opening the bottle" is wrong. Therefore, the court is requested to support the plaintiff's claim. Presiding Judge: Next, the defendant made a speech in the debate.
Defendant entrusts agent:
Defendant:
Presiding Judge: Both sides hold their own words.
Plaintiff: Consumers buy cosmetics not for long-term collection, but for cleaning, protecting and beautifying the skin. Once the cosmetics deteriorate, it will harm the health of consumers through the absorption and penetration of the skin. Therefore, what consumers really care about is not the shelf life of cosmetics in unopened state, but the service life after opening. In order to ensure the safety of consumers' lives and property when using products, Item (4) of Paragraph 1 of Article 27 of the Product Quality Law stipulates that products used within the prescribed time limit shall clearly indicate the production date, safe use period or expiration date in a prominent position. The appellee Lejin Company only marked the "limited use date" on the outer packaging of Hercynian O (superscript 2) Light Skin Rejuvenation Liquid, but did not indicate that this date refers to the shelf life of the product in unopened state. In the first trial, Lejin Company also interpreted the "limited use qualified date" as: "Normal use under normal storage conditions can guarantee the quality without exceeding the service life of the bottom of the bottle." As a professional in cosmetics production, we still can't correctly explain the true meaning of "restricted date". Consumers are not professionals. Without special instructions, it is reasonable to understand the "limited use date" as the safe use period after opening the bottle. Therefore, only marking the "limited use date" without explaining the true meaning of the date can not make consumers correctly understand the safe use period of cosmetics, which is misleading to consumers.
Defendant:
Plaintiff: According to the national standard GB 5296.3- 1995, the general label of cosmetics must indicate the production date and shelf life, or the production batch number and expiration date. According to the Product Quality Law, the production date, safe use date or expiration date should be clearly indicated in a prominent position for the products to be used within a time limit. Looking at the two regulations, the product quality law only puts forward higher requirements for the identification method of restricted products, and the two are not contradictory. Article 8 of the Law on the Protection of Consumers' Rights and Interests in People's Republic of China (PRC) stipulates: "Consumers have the right to know the real situation of the goods they buy or use or the services they receive. Consumers have the right to require business operators to provide prices, places of origin, producers, uses, performance, specifications, grades, main ingredients, production dates, expiration dates, inspection certificates, instructions for use, after-sales services or the contents, specifications and expenses of services, etc. according to different conditions of goods or services. . "The producer who uses the products within a time limit shall indicate the safe use period of the products in a prominent position and clearly inform the consumers. The appellee Lejin Company only marked the "qualified date of restricted use" according to the national standards, but did not mark the safe use period of the products according to the provisions of the Product Quality Law, which infringed the appellant Liu Xuejuan and other consumers' right to know according to law.
Defendant:
Plaintiff: After two trials, Appellant Liu Xuejuan has understood that "limited use qualified date" only refers to the shelf life of Haixi Blue O (superscript 2) Time Recovery Liquid in unopened state, and now she still requires Appellee Lejin Company and Suning Center to mark the service period after opening the bottle on the outer packaging of Haixi Blue O (superscript 2) Time Recovery Liquid. As for the service life of Hercynian O (superscript 2) light rejuvenation liquid after opening the bottle, both Lejin Company and Suning Center said it was difficult to determine. According to the law, LG and Suning Center, as the operators of cosmetics, have the obligation to inform consumers of the safe use period of Haixilan O (superscript 2) age rejuvenation liquid in a clear and unmistakable way after opening the bottle, so as to ensure consumers to use cosmetics safely. Hard to be sure, not uncertain. Enterprises should, in line with the purpose of serving consumers, directly mark the use period after unsealing, explain the true meaning of "restricted use qualified date", or warn consumers that they can't continue to use their products, so as to help consumers fully understand and correctly use their products and eliminate possible misunderstandings. Lejin Company and Suning Center demanded to dismiss Liu Xuejuan's claim, which was difficult to identify and could not be established.
Presiding Judge: There is no new debate between the two sides. The debate is over. Let's ask the final opinion of the parties.
Plaintiff, any final comments? .
Plaintiff: Insist on the claim.
Presiding Judge: Defendant, any final comments?
Defendant: Request to dismiss the plaintiff's claim. (four) the court mediation and judgment stage)
Presiding Judge: We will mediate this case according to the relevant provisions of the law. Defendant, what is your mediation opinion?
Defendant: Do not agree to mediation!
Presiding Judge: What is your mediation opinion, plaintiff?
Plaintiff: Before the lawsuit, both parties had negotiated many times, but the defendant did not have the sincerity to mediate. I don't want to mediate now, waiting for the verdict.
Presiding Judge: Because the plaintiff does not agree to mediation, our court will no longer do mediation work, and the following sentence will be pronounced.
We believe that the facts of this case are clear and can close the case.
The appellee Lejin Company and Suning Center have the obligation to inform consumers of the safe use period of Hercynian O (superscript 2) age rejuvenation liquid after opening the bottle. In civil litigation, the law only protects the legitimate rights and interests of specific civil subjects, so the obligee and subject matter in civil litigation should be specific. Liu Xuejuan, the appellant, asked LG and Suning Center to mark the service period of opening bottles on the package of Haixilan O (superscript 2) Time Rejuvenation Liquid. Although this claim is reasonable, it has involved an unspecified subject of rights and subject matter, which is beyond the scope of this case and is difficult to fully support. However, this lawsuit request contains Liu Xuejuan's desire to know the service life of this bottle of Haixi Blue O (superscript 2) Time-Rejuvenating Liquid. As a consumer, Liu Xuejuan enjoys the right to know. This part of the lawsuit is reasonable and legal and should be supported.
To sum up, the first instance found that the facts were wrong, and the judgment rejected all the claims of the appellant Liu Xuejuan, which should be revised according to law. Accordingly, on March 10, 2005, the Nanjing intermediate people's court ruled that:
First, cancel the civil judgment of first instance.
2. The appellee Lejin Company and Suning Center informed the appellant Liu Xuejuan in writing of the service period of opening the bottle of Haixi Blue O (superscript 2) Light Revitalizing Liquid within three months from the effective date of this judgment.
Three. Liu Xuejuan, the appellant, was dismissed for asking LG and Suning Center to mark the service life of the bottle on the same products as the Hercynian O (superscript 2) Age Rejuvenation Liquid they purchased.
1. The acceptance fee for the second instance case is *** 100 yuan, which shall be borne by the appellant Liu Xuejuan, and the appellee Lejin Company and Suning Center shall bear 40 yuan respectively.
If you refuse to accept this judgment, you can submit one original and two copies of the appeal to the Intermediate People's Court of Ningtai City within 15 days from the date of service of the judgment.
The court is closed. The parties shall read the written record and sign it in our court within five days after the hearing.
Clerk: All rise. After the presiding judge withdrew from the court, the parties and observers withdrew from the court.