##最高法发布食品药品惩罚性赔偿纠纷案件司法解释，维护消费者权益
**中新网8月21日电** 最高人民法院21日举行新闻发布会，发布《最高人民法院关于审理食品药品惩罚性赔偿纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》(以下简称《解释》)及食品安全惩罚性赔偿典型案例。该解释将自2024年8月22日起施行。
最高人民法院民一庭庭长陈宜芳介绍，《解释》共19条，旨在进一步明确食品药品惩罚性赔偿的适用范围和标准，切实维护消费者权益，维护食品药品安全。
针对实践中争议的食品标签及说明书瑕疵认定、代购人责任、小作坊责任、“知假买假”索赔等问题，《解释》作出了明确规定，主要内容包括：
**一、明确惩罚性赔偿金基数，保护普通消费者维权**
《解释》第一条规定，对于因个人或者家庭生活消费需要购买食品的消费者，没有证据证明其明知所购买食品不符合食品安全标准仍然购买的，应当以实际支付价款为基数计算价款十倍的惩罚性赔偿金。这一规定充分保护了普通消费者的维权行为，鼓励消费者积极维护自身权益。
**二、确立退款和返还食品药品规则，消除公众担忧**
《解释》第二条规定，依法应当对食品、药品采取无害化处理、销毁等措施的，应当依照食品安全法、药品管理法的相关规定处理。此举旨在消除人民群众对不合格食品药品再次流入市场的担忧，确保食品药品安全。
**三、明确代购人和食品生产加工小作坊责任**
《解释》第三条规定，以代购为业的代购人应当依法承担惩罚性赔偿责任。第四条则要求准确理解和适用食品安全法规定，既要保护食品安全，又要避免不当加重食品生产加工小作坊和食品摊贩等生产经营者责任。
**四、明确违反哪些食品安全标准应承担惩罚性赔偿责任**
《解释》第五条规定，生产者或者经营者生产、销售的食品不符合食品安全标准，造成消费者损害的，应当承担惩罚性赔偿责任。该条并未排除过程性食品安全标准的适用，人民法院应当对食品不符合过程性食品安全标准是否影响食品安全作出认定。生熟食不分、有害物质与食品混放、包装材料或者运输工具污染食品等行为，违反过程性食品安全标准，危害食品安全的，应当依法承担惩罚性赔偿责任。
**五、规定标签、说明书瑕疵认定规则**
《解释》第六条规定，食品标签、说明书不符合食品安全标准，生产者或者经营者应当承担惩罚性赔偿责任。该条还明确了标签、说明书瑕疵认定的具体标准，为司法实践提供了明确的依据。
陈宜芳表示，此次发布的《解释》是最高人民法院贯彻落实食品安全法和药品管理法的具体体现，将进一步规范食品药品惩罚性赔偿纠纷案件的审理，维护消费者合法权益，维护食品药品安全，促进社会和谐稳定。
英语如下：
##Supreme Court of China Issues New Rules on Punitive Damages for Food and Drug SafetyDisputes
**Keywords:** Food and Drug Compensation, Judicial Interpretation, Typical Cases
**Content:**
**China News Service, August 21** – The Supreme People’s Court held a press conference on August 21 to announcethe “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of Law in Handling Cases of Punitive Damages for Food and Drug Safety Disputes” (hereinafter referredto as the “Interpretation”) and typical cases of punitive damages for food safety. The interpretation will come into effect on August 22, 2024.
Chen Yifang, director of the Civil Division I of theSupreme People’s Court, introduced that the “Interpretation” consists of 19 articles, aiming to further clarify the scope and standards of punitive damages for food and drug safety, effectively protect consumer rights, and safeguard food and drug safety.
Addressing issues of controversy in practice, such as the identification of defects in food labels and instructions, the liability of purchasing agents, the responsibility of small workshops, and claims for “knowing the product is fake but still buying it,” the “Interpretation” provides clear regulations. The main contents include:
**1. Clarifying the Base for Calculating Punitive Damages to Protect Ordinary Consumers’ Rights**
Article 1 of the “Interpretation” stipulates that for consumers who purchase food for personal or family consumption needs, and there is no evidence to prove that they knew the purchased food did not meet food safety standards and still purchased it, punitivedamages should be calculated based on ten times the actual payment amount. This provision fully protects the rights of ordinary consumers and encourages them to actively safeguard their own interests.
**2. Establishing Rules for Refunds and Return of Food and Drugs to Eliminate Public Concerns**
Article 2 of the “Interpretation” stipulates that foodand drugs that should be disposed of harmlessly or destroyed according to law should be handled in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Food Safety Law and the Drug Administration Law. This measure aims to eliminate public concerns about substandard food and drugs re-entering the market and ensure food and drug safety.
**3. Clarifyingthe Responsibilities of Purchasing Agents and Food Production and Processing Small Workshops**
Article 3 of the “Interpretation” stipulates that purchasing agents who engage in purchasing as a business should bear punitive damages according to law. Article 4 requires an accurate understanding and application of the provisions of the Food Safety Law, protecting food safetywhile avoiding undue aggravation of the liability of food production and processing small workshops and food stalls.
**4. Clarifying Which Violations of Food Safety Standards Should Bear Punitive Damages**
Article 5 of the “Interpretation” stipulates that producers or operators who produce or sell food that does not meet food safety standardsand cause consumer harm should bear punitive damages. This article does not exclude the application of process-based food safety standards. People’s courts should determine whether food that does not meet process-based food safety standards affects food safety. Acts such as mixing raw and cooked food, mixing harmful substances with food, and contaminatingfood with packaging materials or transportation vehicles violate process-based food safety standards and endanger food safety, and should bear punitive damages according to law.
**5. Stipulating Rules for Identifying Defects in Labels and Instructions**
Article 6 of the “Interpretation” stipulates that producers or operators should bear punitive damages if foodlabels and instructions do not meet food safety standards. This article also clarifies specific standards for identifying defects in labels and instructions, providing clear guidance for judicial practice.
Chen Yifang stated that the “Interpretation” issued this time is a concrete manifestation of the Supreme People’s Court’s implementation of the Food Safety Lawand the Drug Administration Law. It will further standardize the handling of cases involving punitive damages for food and drug safety disputes, protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, safeguard food and drug safety, and promote social harmony and stability.
【来源】http://www.chinanews.com/gn/2024/08-21/10272223.shtml
Views: 0