case

The clothes were found to plug the tag and sewing clothing fabric elements within the logo below do not match, Miss Lau in a well-known clothing company to negotiate with the fruit of the situation without a lawsuit against the company, require the company to refund the purchase price 3940 million, and doubling the compensation 3940 yuan. 1 Intermediate People's Court was informed that from the city, the court has the case was made final, the well-known apparel companies assume "retreat one indemnity a" responsibility.In March 2009, Miss Lau to a well-known clothing company purchased a total of 3940 yuan for girls wool cardigan, girls short-sleeved T-shirts and other clothing. Miss Xiang Liu, the company issued a sales vouchers and invoices. Later, Miss Lau found that she is buying plug-in tag with sewing clothes, clothing fabric elements within the logo below is inconsistent with the company to negotiate accordingly. Not a bilateral consultation, Miss Lau taken to court demanding an order to buy the clothes she returned to the company by the company refund the purchase price 3940 yuan and 3940 yuan extra compensation.After Miss Liu, the company bought the clothes will do the identification, appraisal report shows that external tag with the clothes and fabric clothes do have access to, so the company's reluctance to provide identification of the report as evidence.Court of First Instance, after hearing that the plug-in clothing and clothing does not match the actual fabric of the tag, its conduct constitutes civil fraud, it ruled that the company's commitment to "retreat one indemnity a" responsibility.The company refused to accept the Shanghai Intermediate People's Court filed a lawsuit, claiming that Miss Lau as well as the first instance of an agent, in the past on many occasions with similar means in the courts, so she is not a true sense of the consumers, and that she had purchased defective goods to the courts demanding compensation for businesses, such behavior is "know to buy fake fake," not a real consumer behavior. Miss Liu argued that, once litigation actions not mean she is not a consumer, can not be an excuse to justify the consumer business fraud.1 Intermediate People's Court, after hearing that, Miss Lau at the well-known clothing company Office has purchased a wool cardigan girls, girls short-sleeved T-shirts and other clothing, and these clothes, fabrics and clothes, the actual plug-tag expressed in the fabric composition and content is not consistent with the fact that the trial has also been identified, so the Court has confirmed the company's conduct constitutes civil fraud. Miss Liu has filed suit how many times there is no direct relationship with the case, once the litigation and can not be denied the status of Miss Liu consumers good reason, let alone a business selling goods in the course of the exemption reason for the existence of fraud, so for the Company's exemption request, the court did not support. In conclusion, the court was made the previous final. True Religion Womens Cameron Boyfriend Jean Hu Tangerine