A case adjudicated by the Beijing Internet Court (BIC), which involved a dispute over an information network sales contract, was selected by the Supreme People's Court as one of the six typical cases concerning consumer rights protection. 

Case summary

The plaintiff, surnamed Yu, spent over 2,000 yuan ($295.60) buying a weight-loss food product from the online store of the defendant, Zhang. The product's promotional image indicated that it was manufactured by a certain health product company. After receiving the product, Yu discovered that the company's business license had been revoked over 10 years ago and then reported the case to the public security authorities, leading to a criminal investigation (handled separately) against Zhang for suspected production and sale of toxic or harmful food.

Tests revealed that the product in question contained sibutramine, a prohibited food additive. Yu filed a lawsuit, arguing that the weight-loss food sold by Zhang failed to meet food safety standards, and requesting punitive damages of 10 times the purchase price.

Details of the judgment

The BIC held that, pursuant to the Food Safety Law, where a business operator sells food products known to be non-compliant with food safety standards, the consumer may claim compensation of 10 times the price; and the seller's failure to perform its duty of inspection and verification, and its sale of harmful food products, shall be deemed as knowingly selling food products that do not meet food safety standards. The weight-loss food sold in Zhang's online store was labeled as being manufactured by a company whose license had long been revoked, and was found to contain sibutramine, a prohibited and toxic food additive, thus rendering it substandard food. The court upheld Yu's claim for tenfold compensation and ordered Zhang to pay over 20,000 yuan in punitive damages.

Significance

Some business operators add prohibited substances to weight-loss foods for illicit profits. This judgment, ordering the illegal operator to pay tenfold punitive damages, reflects the judiciary's "zero tolerance" for food safety violations. It also reminds consumers to buy food from legitimate sources and to remain vigilant about the safety and compliance of food ingredients.