Is it infringement to prohibit take-away drinks in cinemas?

This is an infringement on consumers' right to choose independently.

According to consumer protection law

Article 9 Consumers have the right to choose their own commodities or services.

Consumers have the right to choose the goods or services provided by business operators independently, choose the varieties of goods or services independently, and decide whether to buy or not to buy any kind of goods or accept or not to accept any kind of services independently.

Consumers have the right to compare, identify and choose their own goods or services.

Article 24 If the goods or services provided by business operators do not meet the quality requirements, consumers may return them according to the provisions of the state and the agreement of the parties concerned, or require business operators to fulfill the obligation of replacement and repair.

If there is no state regulation and agreement between the parties, consumers can return the goods within seven days from the date of receipt; After seven days, if the legal conditions for termination of the contract are met, consumers can return the goods in time. If it does not meet the statutory conditions for terminating the contract, it may require the operator to fulfill the obligations of replacement and repair.

Where goods are returned, replaced or repaired in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the business operator shall bear the necessary expenses such as transportation.

Extended data

Case:

Xiao Wang, a college student in Yantai, was stopped when he went to the cinema to see a movie. The reason is that Xiao Wang brought drinks bought from the supermarket outside, which violated the principle that cinemas explicitly refused to bring their own drinks. Afterwards, Xiao Wang filed a complaint with the cinema. Recently, the court ruled that the defendant cinema's "refusal to bring its own drinks" was invalid, and the plaintiff Xiao Wang won the case.

According to the civil judgment of Yantai lai shan People's Court, at the end of February 20 14, the plaintiff Xiao Wang went to a cinema in Yantai to watch a movie. Before entering the market, Xiao Wang bought a drink from the supermarket outside, ready to watch and drink. However, when he checked in, Xiao Wang was stopped by the theater staff because he was not allowed to bring his own food and drinks when watching movies in the theater, and asked Xiao Wang to deposit them.

On the back of the movie ticket that Xiao Wang bought, it was clearly written that the audience should not bring food and drinks that are not sold in this theater into the theater. In addition, the electronic screen at the ticket gate shows "No take-away food (including drinks)" and other contents. In this case, as a consumer, Xiao Wang felt that his legal rights had been violated, so he sued the cinema in Laishan People's Court.

According to Article 9 of the Consumer Protection Law, consumers have the right to choose their own goods or services, and consumers have the right to choose their own goods or services provided by business operators.

In addition, consumers have the right to compare, identify and choose goods or services. Moreover, Article 24 of the Law on the Protection of Consumers' Rights and Interests (1994) stipulates that business operators shall not make unfair and unreasonable provisions to consumers by means of standard contracts, notices, statements, shop notices, etc. , or reduce or exempt its civil liability for harming the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. Format contract, notice, statement, store notice, etc. If it contains the contents listed in the preceding paragraph, its contents are invalid.

The defendant informed the audience through the electronic screen that "rejecting foreign food" belongs to the "shop notice" in the above-mentioned legal provisions, and the cinema did not prohibit the audience from eating while watching the movie, and was not allowed to take the food away, implying that "if you want to eat, you must buy it in our shop", which constituted an infringement on consumers' right to choose independently.

In addition, cinema goods are higher than the market price, and its behavior of restricting competition is also an "unfair and unreasonable regulation" for consumers. Therefore, the Laishan People's Court made a default judgment on the cinema, and ruled that the cinema's "refusal to deliver food" was invalid, and the case acceptance fee was borne by the cinema.

References:

Qilu. A cinema in Yantai is forbidden to bring drinks. A college student went to court for infringement.

References:

National People's Congress-People's Republic of China (PRC) Consumer Rights Protection Law