Research On The Application Of Punitive Damages For Illegal Food Labeling

Become effective as of October 1.2015,the Food Safety Act compared to the 2009 edition of the Food Safety Act has carried on the more significant change,one of the highlights is the improvement of the system of punitive damages,particularly in the second paragraph of article one hundred and forty-eight of the regulation,increase the "food label flaw does not affect the food safety and not to mislead consumers" punitive damages applicable exclusions.The rule made label illegal aspects of the punitive compensation system more appropriate practical problems,more flexible,given at the discretion of the judge is bigger also,however,the author thinks that,label illegal penal problem in practice there are still some controversy,for example,the verification of compliance with food safety standards is to form judgment standard or substantial judgment criteria;Whether illegal labeling is equivalent to "not meeting food safety standards";How to apply the label defects that "do not affect food safety" and "do not mislead consumers" stipulated in article 148 of the food safety law directly determines whether the punitive compensation system is applicable to illegal labels.The author in this article,in view of these questions will be discussed food labels illegal case applicable conditions of punitive damages,through a combination of three cases of two levels of court's judgment in the analysis of China's food safety law labels of the actual situation of illegal punitive damages for inductive disputes,and analyze the issues,then case conclusion and enlightenment.This paper consists of three parts: introduction,body and conclusion.The body is divided into three chapters.The main contents include: chapter one,introduction to typical cases and analysis of the focus of disputes.Among them,the author briefly introduced the details of the three cases.By sorting out the details of the cases,the judgment points of the two courts were clarified.Whether the addition of American ginseng in ZhengNengKang Purple Maca violates the food safety standard,and whether the addition of Maca does not indicate on the label that it is not suitable for people and the limit of consumption,and whether it does not meet the food safety standard;The production date and the production license number are not marked on the food labels.Therefore,the first controversy focus of this case is whether the food labels meet the "food safety standard".The second focus issue is whether the operator "knows clearly" that the food label content does not meet the food safety standards.In the three cases,the court made different conclusions in essence or form.The third controversial focus is whether label defects affect food safety and cause consumers to mislead.In this part,the author also summarizes the reasoning of the court.Chapter two,the jurisprudence analysis of the dispute focus and the judicial practice method.In this chapter,the author makes a detailed and in-depth legal analysis of the three controversial focus points summarized in the first chapter,and explains the legal provisions,judicial review methods and identification principles of "food safety standards".This paper analyzes and summarizes the determination method of whether the operator's subjective state is "knowing clearly".In the third part of this chapter,the author analyzes the practical practices and puts forward his own ideas on whether label defects affect food safety and cause consumer misguidance.Chapter three,the conclusion and enlightenment of the case study.Through the analysis of the legal theory and practice of the focus issues above,the author draws the conclusion of the case and summarizes three inspirations: to clarify the examination standards of food safety standards;Defining the standard of "knowing clearly";Bring gross negligence into the adjustment scope of punitive compensation system;To clarify whether food label defects affect food safety and mislead consumers to identify the way.