Professional counterfeiters "fished and faked", and the court rejected the original request.
With the improvement of the concept of honest management, many businesses have played the slogan of "fake one loses ten" at present, and the market management department has also increased the punishment for counterfeit goods and inferior goods that infringe on consumers’ rights and interests, which provides an opportunity for some so-called "professional counterfeiters". Recently, the administrative court of Shouxian People’s Court rejected a case of improper performance of statutory duties of administrative punishment caused by "professional counterfeiters".
Li, the plaintiff, claimed that he bought a bottle of carved yellow wine in a supermarket in a town of Shouxian on July 10, 2022. The production date of the food was July 8, 2019, and the shelf life was 36 months, which had passed the shelf life. It reported to the supermarket that the carved yellow wine had expired, and the supermarket also admitted it in WeChat. Later, Li reported to the defendant’s market supervision bureau that the supermarket sold expired food through the 12315 platform, and clearly stated in the report materials that he could provide evidence such as shopping receipts, food photos and shopping videos. On October 12, 2022, the Market Supervision Bureau gave feedback to Li through the platform, saying that expired food was not found in the supermarket and would not be handled. Li believes that the defendant did not collect the shopping video evidence from himself to conduct a comprehensive investigation, and the supermarket itself admitted to selling expired carved yellow wine, and the defendant did not properly perform the investigation and punishment duties on the illegal acts of selling expired food. Appeal to the people’s court to confirm that the defendant’s behavior is illegal, and at the same time order the defendant to re-file and investigate the behavior of selling expired food in the supermarket.
The Market Supervision Bureau said: On March 7, 2023, after receiving the video of the supermarket shopping process taken by the plaintiff Li, who was transferred by the court, the suspected illegal behavior of the supermarket was re-investigated; However, when the plaintiff reported the case before, he deliberately did not provide the video of his shopping process in the supermarket, which caused the operator to be unable to be punished because he did not have key evidence, thus causing unnecessary consumption of administrative resources. Through the national 12315 platform search, it is also found that since the platform was opened, the plaintiff Li has registered a total of 3,100 complaints and reports with the market supervision authorities through the platform, and nearly 100 reports have been registered in the jurisdiction of the market supervision bureau alone. It can be seen that the plaintiff Li does not belong to normal consumers, and his purpose is to profit from complaints and reports. He does not belong to complaints and reports made by ordinary consumers to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests or social public interests, and his motivation to file a lawsuit in this case is not justified. According to the clues provided by citizens, legal persons and organizations, the market supervision authorities investigate and deal with the operators’ behaviors suspected of violating the laws, regulations and rules of market supervision and management, which belongs to the performance of duties to safeguard social public interests. The plaintiff Li has no interest in the specific investigation results made by the market supervision bureau and does not have the plaintiff qualification in administrative litigation. Therefore, please dismiss the prosecution of the plaintiff Li.
The court found that the plaintiff Li had repeatedly adopted "purchasing goods with defective quality and logo, and then reported to the market supervision authorities with relevant evidence such as obtaining goods, and made a reward request to the market supervision authorities; Or claim compensation from the operator through civil litigation "and so on, in order to make a profit, the purpose of purchasing goods is not for consumption or use, and it no longer has the essential characteristics of" consumers "referred to in the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests in People’s Republic of China (PRC), and should belong to" professional counterfeiters "commonly known in society. Judging from his claims in this case, the purpose of Li’s lawsuit is to supervise the legality of the handling of the reported matters by the Market Supervision Bureau, and it does not involve the issue of whether the administrative processing result has an interest, and it does not provide relevant evidence that the administrative processing result has an interest. It can be seen that Li’s reporting to the market supervision bureau and filing a lawsuit in this case are not complaints and lawsuits made by ordinary consumers to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests.
To sum up, Li does not meet the essential legal characteristics of "plaintiff" as defined in the Administrative Procedure Law, and does not have the subject qualification to file a lawsuit in this case. Our court ruled that all the applications of Li were rejected.
Original title: "Professional counterfeiters" fishing and counterfeiting ",the court rejected the original request"
Read the original text