The batch of five cases focuses on issues in online consumption, including false advertising by operators, seven-day no-reason returns, misleading consumers, concert ticket refunds, and the excessive collection of consumer information.
Some businesses engage in false advertising in the field of live-stream shopping,. In the Typical Case No.1, Hou v. Zhang, the operator promised in the live stream that the sold bracelet was made of pterocarpus santalinus and claimed “genuine guarantee” and “tenfold compensation for fakes”, but the delivered product was made of black rosewood, a different wood. The court ordered the operator to compensate the consumer ten times the price as promised, namely CNY 10,000.
The Chinese court held that when the quality of goods does not conform to the promise, compensation should be made. Although the operator’s promise of tenfold compensation is higher than the threefold compensation standard stipulated in the “Law of the People’s Republic of China on Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests”, this promise constitutes the content of the information network sales contract between the consumer and the operator, and the operator should perform as agreed. This case is conducive to sanctioning consumption fraud and fully protecting the rights of individual consumers.
Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team
