北大法宝推出“法宝双语案例”栏目。本栏目选取近期热门司法案例进行双语发布，每两周一期，欢迎关注！感谢新老朋友对北大法宝的大力支持，我们会持续为大家提供更好的法律信息服务。本周推送第一百四十九期，主要关注涉侵权责任纠纷案例！
本期双语案例推送车函倩诉连云港亲亲袋鼠教育咨询有限公司、连云港苏宁置业有限公司苏宁广场购物分公司等侵权责任纠纷案等涉侵权责任纠纷案例。
目录
Contents
1.车函倩诉连云港亲亲袋鼠教育咨询有限公司、连云港苏宁置业有限公司苏宁广场购物分公司等侵权责任纠纷案
Che Hanqian v. Lianyungang Qinqin Daishu Education Consulting Co., Ltd. and Suning Plaza Shopping Branch of Lianyungang Suning Real Estate Co., Ltd., et al. (case of dispute over tort liability)
2.颜荷莲、程玉环诉周宜霞、吉林天药科技有限责任公司等侵权责任纠纷案
Yan Helian and Cheng Yuhuan v. Zhou Yixia and Jilin Tianyao Technology Co., Ltd., et al. (case of dispute over tort liability)
3.南京市高淳县飞达教育技术装备有限责任公司诉南京市高淳区隆兴农村小额贷款有限公司、江苏金创信用再担保股份有限公司侵权责任纠纷案
Feida Educational Technology and Equipment Co., Ltd. of Gaochun County, Nanjing City v. Longxing Rural Small-Loan Co., Ltd. of Gaochun District, Nanjing City and Jiangsu Jinchuang Credit Re-guarantee Co., Ltd. (case of dispute over tort liability)
一、车函倩诉连云港亲亲袋鼠教育咨询有限公司、连云港苏宁置业有限公司苏宁广场购物分公司等侵权责任纠纷案
Che Hanqian v. Lianyungang Qinqin Daishu Education Consulting Co., Ltd. and Suning Plaza Shopping Branch of Lianyungang Suning Real Estate Co., Ltd., et al. (case of dispute over tort liability)
【裁判摘要】
商场商铺承租人因经营不善等原因倒闭或歇业后，主动与消费者联系退费等事宜，且不存在经营者下落不明导致消费者无法找到交易对象、亦不存在租赁主体不清导致消费者无法区分交易对象的情形，消费者以消费者权益保护法第四十三条为依据，主张商场作为商铺出租人与商铺承租人共同承担赔偿责任的，人民法院不予支持。
[Judgment Abstract]
After a store in a shopping mall is closed or its business is suspended for improper management or other reasons whatsoever, the shop operator, as the lessee, has taken the initiative to contact consumers for refunds and other matters. Besides, neither of the following situations exists: First, the consumers cannot find the counterparty for it has disappeared. Second, the subject of the lease contract is unclear, rendering it impossible for consumers to identify the counterparty. If, under the aforesaid situations, where a consumer claims that the shopping mall, as the lessor of the shop, is jointly liable for compensation along with the lessee in accordance with Article 43 of the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests, the people's court should dismiss such request.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.431833417
[CLI Code] CLI.C.431833417(EN)
二、颜荷莲、程玉环诉周宜霞、吉林天药科技有限责任公司等侵权责任纠纷案
Yan Helian and Cheng Yuhuan v. Zhou Yixia and Jilin Tianyao Technology Co., Ltd., et al. (case of dispute over tort liability)
【裁判摘要】
一、保健食品的广告内容必须真实，应以行政主管部门核准的保健功能为准，不得更改和扩大，不得含有虚假、夸大的内容，不得涉及疾病预防、治疗功能。销售企业或经销商推销保健食品时提供的大量宣传资料，如其内容与该保健食品产品说明书载明的功效不一，且不同程度明示或暗示该保健食品具有抗菌、消炎、抗病毒、抗肿瘤、消除疾病等药理作用，则销售企业或经销商宣传保健食品功效的上述违规行为构成虚假宣传，依法应承担虚假宣传责任。
二、根据谁主张谁举证的举证规则，销售企业或经销商的虚假宣传行为与消费者延误治疗是否具有关联，以及与消费者死亡是否存在因果关系及参与度如何确定，应由死者近亲属承担相应举证责任。如当事人未能提供证据或者证据不足以证明其事实主张的，依法由负有举证证明责任的当事人承担不利的后果。
三、经营者向消费者提供有关商品或者服务的质量、性能、用途、有效期限等信息，应当真实、全面，不得作虚假或者引人误解的宣传。经营者提供商品或者服务有欺诈行为的，消费者有权在法律规定的幅度内主张惩罚性赔偿金。
[Judgment Abstract]
1. The advertising contents of health care food must be true, and shall be subject to the health protection functions approved by the administrative department, meaning that no alteration or expansion is allowed, such as containing false or exaggerated contents, and involving disease prevention and treatment functions. If the contents of the publicity materials provided in quantity by distributors in their promotion of the health care food differ from the functions indicated in its product specifications, and to varying degrees, indicate in an explicit or implicit manner that the health care food has pharmacological functions such as antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antiviral, or anti-tumor effects, or eradication of diseases, the above-mentioned violations constitute the false publicity, and distributors should be held as liable according to law.
2. Under the principle of ‘burden of proof borne by claimant’, the close relatives of the deceased should bear the corresponding burden of proof for whether the false publicity behavior of the distributor is related to the delayed treatment of the consumer, whether there is a causal relationship between the false publicity and the death of the consumer, and how is a determination to be made on the participation degree. If the party fails to provide evidence or the evidence is insufficient to prove its factual claims, the party with the burden of proof should assume the adverse consequences incurred therefrom according to law.
3. Business operators shall provide consumers with true and complete information on the quality, performance, use, and useful life, among others, of commodities or services, and shall not conduct any false or misleading promotion. Where the business operators fraudulently provide commodities or services, consumers have the right to claim punitive compensation within the scope stipulated by laws.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.67961292
[CLI Code] CLI.C.67961292(EN)
三、南京市高淳县飞达教育技术装备有限责任公司诉南京市高淳区隆兴农村小额贷款有限公司、江苏金创信用再担保股份有限公司侵权责任纠纷案
Feida Educational Technology and Equipment Co., Ltd. of Gaochun County, Nanjing City v. Longxing Rural Small-Loan Co., Ltd. of Gaochun District, Nanjing City and Jiangsu Jinchuang Credit Re-guarantee Co., Ltd. (case of dispute over tort liability)
【裁判摘要】
债权人和债务人明知债务已清偿，债权人积极起诉担保人要求其承担连带清偿责任，债务人消极应诉且承认债权，系滥用诉讼权利损害担保人合法权益的共同侵权行为，担保人依法提出赔偿合理的律师费用等正当要求，应予支持。
[Judgment Abstract]
Where the creditor and the debtor know that the debt has been paid off, but the creditor still actively sues the guarantor for its assumption of the joint and several liability for satisfaction of the debt, and the debtor passively responds to the claim and recognizes the creditor's right, such act is a joint tort which damages lawful rights and interests of the guarantor by means of the abuse of procedural rights. Therefore, the people's court shall sustain such just claims as compensation for the reasonable lawyers' expenses raised by the guarantor according to law.
|
