Case Study On The Protection Of Consumer Rights And Interest In Time Sharing Vacation

Timeshare originated in Europe in the last century. As a new tourist resort way into our country, its development in China is at an early stage. Based on China's national conditions and the feature of the product, there are many problems emerge along the development of timeshare vacation industry, which cause the growing number of consumer complaints. Since our currency law system of timeshare vacation is not perfect as well as timeshare market and industry, customer interests are subject to different degrees of damage and can not be effectively protected. Therefore, it is really necessary regulate timeshare industry in our country, and judicial officers must have a clear understanding about the feature of timeshare product in order to correctly using relevant laws and regulations to help settle issues fairness and effectiveness.This paper using the method of case study to study the case of Mr. Chen and Mr. Ren suing China united travel company. Under the status quo of the judiciary of our country, taking the controversial points as well as the changing of trails of the case as the entry point, and using relative theoretical analysis, this paper studying the nature of underwriting agreement by two sides, the possibility of terminating the contracts, and the effective way of protecting consumer interest. This paper is divided into three chapters to deal with the case study. The first chapter is a brief introduction of the backgrounds and the court tail situation of the case. The second chapter summarized the focus of controversy and the main reason held by different parties. The third chapter is mainly using related legal concepts and opinions held by two parties to analysis the controversial points, includes the the definition of timeshare, features and legal relations, the nature and scope of content, service contracts of timeshare, consumer rights protection, etc. Mainly discussion includes the specific focus of controversy involved in the case, which involves the nature of the contract, basis for dissolution of the contract and consumer interest protection. Final conclusions are as follows:It is more appropriate to consider timeshare contracts as Work-for-hire Contracts than Agency Appointment Contracts under the currency disputing condition of timeshare contracts, and quoting the right of optional cancellation in Work-for-hire Contracts is sensible. Besides, the consumer protection is still insufficient in this case, and the right of optional cancellation exercise is also subject to certain restrictions. Therefore, we propose to fully draw on the experience of advanced foreign country's related laws and regulations, such as the cooling-off period, the information disclosure system and the trustee system. At the same time, we need to improve our consumer right of withdrawal, extends and expanse the scope of application of the right and properly protect the interests of consumers, in order to benefit our country's timeshare industry and settle the similar contracts disputes more properly.