Chinese Consumers Revocation System Research

March 15, 2014, China’s "Consumer Protection Law," the official implementation of the amendment, the amendment increases the number of line with current economic development needs, to better reflect the consumer protection provisions, especially the "Consumer Protection Law " Article 25, which provides that the provisions of the consumer unconditional return under certain conditions, this is the first confirmation of consumer law called consumer " estoppel rights "(hereinafter referred to as the consumer right of withdrawal), and to put it into purposes, but which provides that there are still many uncertainties, such as the right of withdrawal of consumers whether to expand the scope of the exercise and the legal consequences of the provisions of the way if you want to clear some consumers abuse and how to withdraw the right to regulate issues such as these will lead to reality there are some difficulties in the implementation of life, so I wrote this article, interpret and assess the system and by comparative law, hoping for the practical application of the system in our help.This article was written in the new law after the analysis of the concept of the right to withdraw the definition of consumer and our consumers the right to withdraw the legal property of and research on comparative law, but also by invoking legislative model and advanced experience of foreign countries in all regions, to improve consumers withdraw our right system recommendations.This paper consists of three parts:Part I: describes the concept, origin and legal property right of withdrawal of consumers. Consumers right of withdrawal system originated in England, and later further improvement and development in Germany, France and the United States; This paper analyzes the consumer the right to withdraw special attributes, especially given the scope of the property, such as remote trading, home sales, is different from the other the right to revoke the rights only within a specific range allowed consumers; consumers the right to withdraw without reason in the world to reach a consensus, so that consumers are free to use more of the right; non-judicial procedural characteristics of the consumers but also to ensure the right of withdrawal of the right of consumers to apply simple and efficient. This article will also be the right of withdrawal of consumers and China’s "Contract Law" in the right of cancellation and withdrawal rights and the right of return no reason to compare, analyze the differences between the consumer and the other three right of withdrawal rights, such as the applicable prerequisite and what legal consequences are, to better show the consumer the right to withdraw the special nature of its existence, in order to better improve our consumer right of withdrawal system.Part II: comparative study carried out by the method of civil law and common law systems in the legislative provisions on the right of withdrawal of consumers to explore, discover and advanced legislative experience abroad worth our place to learn, for example, the withdrawal of German consumers a strict regulation on the broad scope of the right to carry out detailed provisions on the legal consequences of exercising the right of withdrawal in Taiwan consumer after the United Kingdom and the United States in how consumers use and exercise the right of withdrawal of the way, the EU split Return on to win the title gives a clearly defined problem and the problem of the abuse of the right of withdrawal is also clearly defined. For lack of the right of withdrawal system, learn from foreign advanced through legislation and experience, to better improve our right of withdrawal system.Part III: China’s new "Consumer Protection Act" provides consumers the right to withdraw the regime assessment, and some question whether it can be applied to specific consumer right of withdrawal and the problems of the new consumer law does not provide for in-depth analysis. Whether the contract in tourism consumers should be given the right to withdraw? I believe that should be given, by legislation learn from the experience of Japan, combined with the travel contract has its own peculiarities, consumers in a weak position in the travel contract should be protected; whether consumers should bear the responsibility for the unpacking of goods? To solve this problem, I think we ought to dialectical analysis, by learning the practice of the European Union, does not affect the secondary sales and damaged it is necessary to unpack, consumers do not need to take responsibility, but consumers should be deliberately caused damage compensation. The third part is also in accordance with China’s actual situation, the consumer’s right of withdrawal system in my country were explored, I believe there are four deficiencies, such as the right of consumers to withdraw the scope is too narrow, exercised the right of withdrawal and the legal consequences not clearly defined and no regulation of consumer abuse of the right of withdrawal. For the four points less, the author puts forward some suggestions, such as learning German and EU practice, will expand the scope of the right of consumers to withdraw to home sales, consumer and other advances; learning experience in Germany and the United States, the consumer’s right of withdrawal exercise to clear the way and the legal consequences; put some of their own precautions against abuse of the right of withdrawal problems consumers.