May 31, 2010
---------------------
Monday
>>>Welcome visitor, you're not logged in.
Login   Subscribe Now!
Home User Management About Us Chinese
  Bookmark   Download   Print
Search:  serch "Fabao" Window Font Size: Home PageHome PageHome Page
 
Sheng Haiyan v. the 120th Branch of Shanghai Yongqi Improve Look & Hair Operation and Management Co., Ltd., Shanghai Yongqi Improve Look & Hair Operation and Management Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over a service contract)
盛海燕与上海永琪美容美发经营管理有限公司第一百二十分公司、上海永琪美容美发经营管理有限公司服务合同纠纷案
【法宝引证码】
*尊敬的用户,您好!本篇仅为该案例的英文摘要。北大法宝提供单独的翻译服务,如需整篇翻译,请发邮件至database@chinalawinfo.com,或致电86 (10) 8268-9699进行咨询。
*Dear user, this document contains only a summary of the respective judicial case. To request a full-text translation as an additional service, please contact us at:  + 86 (10) 8268-9699 database@chinalawinfo.com
 
 
   Sheng Haiyan v. the 120th Branch of Shanghai Yongqi Improve Look & Hair Operation and Management Co., Ltd., Shanghai Yongqi Improve Look & Hair Operation and Management Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over a service contract)
(case regarding dispute over a service contract)
盛海燕与上海永琪美容美发经营管理有限公司第一百二十分公司、上海永琪美容美发经营管理有限公司服务合同纠纷案

[Key Terms] service contract ; fraud ; consumer ; double damages
[核心术语] 服务合同;欺诈;消费者;加倍赔偿

[Disputed Issues] If the claim filed by a consumer for damage compensation includes double damages from the business operator, the operator's act should constitute the essential elements for assumption of the liability for damage compensation.
[争议焦点] 消费者要求经营者承担损害赔偿责任包括基于欺诈的加倍赔偿责任的,应当符合经营者承担赔偿损失责任的构成要件。

[Case Summary] Where a consumer files a claim demanding the business operator to bear the liability for damage compensation including double damages on the ground that the operator has committed fraud the operator's act so alleged should constitute the essential elements for assumption of the liability for damage compensation. The essential elements include breach of contract damage consequences...
[案例要旨] 消费者依据《消费者权益保护法》要求经营者承担损害赔偿责任包括基于欺诈的加倍赔偿责任的应当符合经营者承担赔偿损失责任的构成要件...

Full-text Omitted.

 

盛海燕与上海永琪美容美发经营管理有限公司第一百二十分公司、上海永琪美容美发经营管理有限公司服务合同纠纷案

  裁判书字号
 一审判决书:上海市松江区人民法院(2011)松民一(民)初字第8936号民事判决书。
 二审调解书:上海市第一中级人民法院(2012)沪一中民一(民)终字第759号民事调解书。
 案由:服务合同纠纷。
 诉讼双方
 原告(被上诉人):盛海燕
 委托代理人:宁振云,上海一凡律师事务所律师。
 被告:上海永琪美容美发经营管理有限公司第一百二十分公司
 负责人:吴的林。
 被告(上诉人):上海永琪美容美发经营管理有限公司(以下简称永琪公司),
 法定代表人:王采勇,公司董事长。
 两被告共同委托代理人:朱鹰、陆碧晶,上海市汇达丰律师事务所律师。
 审级:二审。
 审判机关和审判组织
 一审法院:上海市松江区人民法院。
 独任审判:审判员:黄勇。
 二审法院:上海市第一中级人民法院。
 合议庭组成人员:审判长:单珏;代理审判员:岑佳欣、潘春霞。
 审结时间
 一审审结时间:2012年2月8日。
 二审审结时间:2012年3月13日。
  一审诉辩主张
 原告盛海燕诉称:原告在被告永琪公司九亭店理发,被告员工看到原告脸上黄斑后,告知其店内刚买进了价值一百多万元的蓝宝石e光仪器可以祛斑,极力游说原告做祛斑美容治疗。最后,原告在该店支付10 000元购买了面值10 000元的美容美发消费vip卡,并以5 800元的价款在该店做祛斑美容治疗,该款项是从卡中扣款2 000元,另外由购卡时赠送的3 800元抵扣。原告在第一次做完祛斑美容治疗后,未见效果,反增新的黑斑,第二次依旧如此,之后原告不敢继续治疗,并多次与被告协商赔偿事宜,均未果。现起诉至法院,要求判令被告赔偿原告人身损害费七千余元、退还祛斑美容费5 800元,另外因欺诈行为赔偿原告5 800元。
 被告永琪公司辩称:原告诉状所称并非事实,其在永琪公司九亭店充值5 000元、消费2 000元均有记录,但只是进行一般的护理。被告给原告提供的是淡斑理疗而非仪器祛斑,没有使用医疗仪器和医疗产品,没有恶意欺诈行为。被告的行为和原告的损害没有因果关系,故被告不同意原告的诉讼请求。
 一审事实和证据
 上海市松江区人民法院经公开审理查明:2011年4月19日,原告因脸上存在黄斑在被告永琪公司九亭店支付10 000元,办理2张各5 000元的美容美发消费卡。同日,永琪公司九亭店向原告出具收据一张,写明“祛斑疗程5 800元办卡、10 000元送3 800元卡内2 000元、做到没有斑为止”的内容。
 ......



Dear visitor,you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases . If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe . You can purchase a single article through Online Pay to immediately view and download this document. Should you have any questions, please contact us at:
+86 (10) 8268-9699 or +86 (10) 8266-8266 (ext. 153)
Mobile: +86 133-1157-0713
Fax: +86 (10) 8266-8268
database@chinalawinfo.com


 


您好:您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区,如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户,请注册并交纳相应费用成为我们的英文会员 ;您也可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇案例 。如有问题请来电咨询;
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: database@chinalawinfo.com


     
     
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝www.lawinfochina.com
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code!
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials.
 
Home | Products and Services | FAQ | Disclaimer | Chinese | Site Map
©2012 Chinalawinfo Co., Ltd.    database@chinalawinfo.com  Tel: +86 (10) 8268-9699  京ICP证010230-8