Research On Legal Issues Of Pricing Errors In Online Purchase Contracts

The rise of e-commerce has freed people from the shackles of traditional offline trading models,and online shopping has become one of the main shopping methods nowadays.In online shopping,mispricing of goods or services is very common,and court decisions on such cases are also inconsistent.This article analyzes and summarizes the existing cases of pricing errors,selects 33 typical cases,and summarizes the table based on whether the online shopping contract is established and whether the contract can be revoked.Regarding pricing error cases,the focus of controversy in existing judicial decisions is mainly on four aspects:the determination of the validity of standard terms,the determination of the nature of commodity pricing web pages,the application of significant misunderstandings,and consumers’ malicious "stealing wool".This article analyzes and discusses the theoretical and practical disputes that are the focus of the above-mentioned four cases,and finally proposes research suggestions on legal remedies for pricing error disputes in this article.Firstly,in cases of pricing errors,the product pricing webpage,as a prerequisite for determining whether an online shopping contract can be established,has become the key to the trial of the case.Objective standards should be used to judge whether it meets the requirements of the offer from the perspective of consumers;Secondly,in determining the effectiveness of standard terms,it is necessary to determine whether the standard terms comply with the requirements of form and substance based on Article 49 of the Electronic Commerce Law.At the same time,the principle of cautious application should be adopted for those related to Article 49(2)of the Electronic Commerce Law;Third,with regard to the application of the major misunderstanding system,the new judicial interpretation has included the "price" factor into the category of major misconceptions.In addition,judges can also determine whether operators have a wrong understanding of their own behavior by comprehensively considering five factors,including the content of the fault of the business,remedial measures and the consequences of damage.At the same time,the major fault of the operator is taken as an exception to the exercise of the cancellation right;Fourthly,in response to the malicious behavior of"picking up wool",consumers do not have a good faith trust interest.Operators can use the system of significant misunderstandings and obvious unfairness to remedy their own interests.When the current litigation channels cannot be applied,the judicial authorities can also apply the principle of good faith to block the malicious wool party’s right to request contract performance.