International Open Access Journal Platform

食品标签瑕疵导致的惩罚性 赔偿问题 ——锦江麦德龙现购自运有限公司西安雁塔商场与 常某买卖合同纠纷案

Punitive Damages Caused by Food Label Defects —The Case of Disputes Between Yanta Mall and Changs’ Sales Contract in Xi’an

Advance in Law / 2021,3(3): 191-199 / 2021-07-22 568 871

View Download PDF

• Authors: 张丽燕     
• Information:

  中南财经政法大学法律硕士教育中心，武汉

• Keywords: Food safety; Food labels; Punitive damages; Proviso 食品安全；食品标签；惩罚性赔偿；但书
• Abstract: This paper starts with classic cases, and analyzes common practical problems around the focus of case disputes to standardize the application of punitive damages provisions in the field of food label defects disputes. When applying Article 148 of food safety law to solve the dispute of food label defects, we must correctly grasp the following aspects: First, Consumer damage is not necessary; Second, food label defects will affect food safety or mislead consumers in order to apply punitive damages; Third, the principle of formal review is the main principle of relevance judgment, supplemented by the principle of substantive review; Fourth, the subjective consciousness of operators and consumers should be strictly examined. 为规范食品标签瑕疵纠纷领域惩罚性赔偿规定的适用，保障市场经济秩序的同时保护消费者权益，本文着手经典案例，围绕案件争议焦点分析常见实践难题。适用《食品安全法》第148 条解决食品标签瑕疵纠纷时，必须正确把握以下几方面内容：第一，消费者实际受害不是惩罚性赔偿的必然要求；第二，该类案件适用惩罚性赔偿要求标签瑕疵会影响食品安全并且会误导消费者；第三，标签瑕疵与食品安全的关联性判断，以形式审查原则为主、实质审查原则为辅；第四，严格审查经营者“明知”与消费者是否被误导。
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.35534/al.0303020
• Cite: 张丽燕．食品标签瑕疵导致的惩罚性赔偿问题——锦江麦德龙现购自运有限公司西安雁塔商场与常某买卖合同纠纷案［J］．法学进展，2021，3（3）：191-199．