Da Vinci furniture was awarded a refund of 3.23 million yuan within 10 days

Recently, Hangzhou Gongshu Court held a hearing on the dispute of the sales contract of Hangzhou Da Vinci Trading Co., Ltd. and made a judgment in court to revoke the agreement between the plaintiff Wei and the defendant Da Vinci; and the defendant Da Vinci returned to Wei. The total amount of the goods was RMB 3.23 million, which was paid within 10 days from the effective date of this judgment; the request for compensation of 700,000 yuan proposed by Wei Heping was rejected. The "Da Vinci" storm lasted for nearly a year, because of its tough attitude in returning goods, many consumers have filed lawsuits in courts across the country, but there has been no case law, Hangzhou's judgment has an unusual significance. The return is not going to court. In May 2011, Hangzhou consumer Wei Heping ordered a batch of solid wood furniture called “Italian imported” from the Da Vinci home in Nanshan Road, Hangzhou, and paid more than 3 million. Yuan's payment. In July of the same year, CCTV's "Weekly Quality Report" revealed that Da Vinci furniture products were suspected of fraud. After seeing the news, Wei Heping felt deceived and filed a return to Da Vinci, but was rejected by Da Vinci. The reason is that Wei Heping did not receive furniture and could not subjectively speculate on the quality of the furniture. In November last year, Wei Heping took Da Vinci to court on the grounds of propaganda and fraud. The plaintiff's attorney, Zhejiang Minkai Law Firm Xu Tao, said that in fact, before the court, Da Vinci's marketing staff had agreed to Mr. Wei's return, and the procedures were also in the process. But I don't know why there was a change later, and I strongly disagreed with Mr. Wei's return. In desperation, Mr. Wei filed a lawsuit against Da Vinci. Da Vinci's false and exaggerated propaganda Xu Tao believes that Da Vinci induced Wei Heping and many consumers to misunderstand his brand image through exaggerated and misleading advertising, so that consumers can make consumer decisions that violate their true meaning. In order to purchase furniture at the defendant, in addition to the basic use of the product, more is based on the full trust of Da Vinci furniture high-end top brand image. During the trial, the defendant’s lawyer had offered a certain discount, but due to the large differences between the two parties, the negotiation and mediation failed. Xu Tao said that his client has lost confidence in the "Da Vinci" brand. Fu Zhijun, a judge of the Gongshu District Court of Hangzhou, said that in December 2011, the Shanghai Administration for Industry and Commerce had imposed administrative penalties on Da Vinci, and found that it violated the product quality law and the advertising law in the distribution process, and adopted top-level Advertising word. Not long ago, Da Vinci also fulfilled the fine. The court found that Da Vinci made false and exaggerated propaganda on the material and brand of the product in order to mislead consumers during the contract with the consumer. The consumer purchased the furniture at the defendant, which is also based on the high-end brand image of Da Vinci. Finch returned more than 3.23 million yuan for customers. Da Vinci apparently did not recognize this ruling. He believed that all the Cabrera furniture he sold was made in Italy and imported into China. He insisted in the court that there was no fraud and denied misleading consumers. The reporter called Da Vinci's attorney, Wang Yang, a lawyer at Zhong Lun Law Firm's Shanghai office. He refused to accept the interview because of his own meeting. The judgment has an exemplary role? Lawyer Wang Lei of Zhejiang Hanqiao Law Firm believes that once this case is determined, the claims of other consumers are relatively smoother, because in the judicial judgment, one principle must be followed: the same case, the same result is processed. This result will have an important guiding role in the trial of similar commercial disputes in the future. Judging from the facts ascertained by the court, the merchants have falsely marked the individual categories of the attributes of the goods, and used the false parts for advertising to show the value of the goods, and to enhance the brand value and sales value. When consumers purchase goods, they lack the ability to distinguish and purchase the goods without real knowledge of the attributes of the goods. Legally speaking, business conduct is contrary to the obligation of honesty and trustworthiness.

The high quality one can be used kill Caligus and sea lice, but no harm for Salmon and water, can used in fresh water and sea water. The low quality one are harm for Salmon, only used to kill fly, ants, cockroach and so on.

The application rate for this use is 0.1 to 0.2 mg/liter as a bath treatment.

The product should be keeped in well-ventilated place and free from exposure on sunshine & raining.

Animal Health

Animal Health,Powder Fishery Medicine,Animal Pharmaceuticals,Miticides For Fish Control Sea Lice

NINGBO LUCKY CHEMICAL INDUSTRY CO. LTD , https://www.chinaluckychem.com

This entry was posted in on