Ox Hammer

【Facts】Zhang signed a fitness membership application form with a fitness company due to personal fitness needs, and agreed that Zhang would apply for a membership card at a fitness company, with the business type being 1600 times, the term being 0 years, and the entrance fee being 0 yuan, with the remarks "0 times, no return or exchange". On the day, Zhang paid all the expenses to a fitness company. Soon after, a fitness company terminated its services. Zhang consumed 0 times in the fitness company, and there were still 0 unused times, so he sued the fitness company to return the remaining fitness service fee of 0 yuan. The trial court held that after Zhang applied for the membership card, a fitness company terminated the service during the contract performance period, and should return the service fee to Zhang. The two parties agreed that a fitness company would provide 0 fitness services and give 0 free services. Under the normal performance of the contract, the consumer can enjoy 0 times of service, and 0 times of service instead of 0 times of service should be regarded as a reasonable consideration for the 0 yuan entrance fee. In the case of the operator's breach of contract and termination of the contract, the protection of consumers should not be less than the benefits that can be obtained under the normal performance of the contract, and the trial court then ordered a fitness company to refund the remaining fee of Zhang's membership card of 0 yuan.

Article 53 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests stipulates that: "Where a business operator provides goods or services in the form of advance payment, it shall provide them in accordance with the agreement. where it is not provided in accordance with the agreement, the agreement shall be performed in accordance with the consumer's requirements or the advance payment shall be returned; and shall bear the interest on the advance payment and the reasonable expenses that the consumer must pay. ”

The court held that in prepaid consumption, it is more common for business operators to give away services to consumers. In the case of normal performance of the contract, the consumer can enjoy both the purchase service and the gift service. If the operator's breach of contract results in the termination of the prepaid consumption contract, the consumer has the right to request the operator to refund the remaining advance payment. When calculating the price of services provided, if the preferential scheme agreed in the contract is not taken into account, the exclusion of the operator's gift of services from the operator's obligations will lead to an overcalculation of the price of the services provided, and the remaining advance payment that should be returned to the consumer will be reduced, and the operator's breach of contract may obtain greater benefits than under the normal performance of the contract, which lacks both legal basis and the principle of fairness. Therefore, in the event that the contract is terminated due to the breach of contract by the operator, the interests of consumers should be protected, and the price of the services provided shall be calculated according to the preferential plan agreed in the contract, so as to fully protect the rights and interests of consumers and guide the operator to abide by the contract and operate in good faith.

(Case source: Supreme People's Court, compiled by reporter Zhang Tianpei)

People's Daily (19/0/0 0 Edition)