Материал: Том 2 № 3
Digital Law Journal.Vol.2, No.3, 2021,p.23–45
Jianing Sang / Internet Court on Solving Online Consumer Contract Disputes: Case of China
7. Disputes arising from infringements upon others’ personal rights, property rights, and other civilrightsandinterestsontheInternet.
8. Product liability disputes arising from the infringements upon others’ personal and property rights and interests by the products purchased through e-commerce platforms due to product defects.
9.Internetpublicinterestlitigationcasesfiledbyprocuratorialorgans.
10. Administrative disputes arising from the administrative actions taken by administrative organs, such as Internet information service management, Internet commodity trading, and related servicemanagement.
11. Other Internet civil and administrative cases the jurisdiction over which is designated by thepeople’scourtathigherlevels.
More specifically, they could be classified into the following types of disputes. This essay here wouldseparatelyillustrateeachtypeofthemindetail.
Online Shopping Disputes
According to the Jurisdiction Guideline, online shopping disputes refer to contract disputes arising from online shopping: seller displays its products on the Internet and makes an offer, the buyer searches the information online and accepts the offer, and then the two parties reach an agreementandtherebyformacontractofsale.Theirdisputearisesoutofthesigning ortheperformance ofthecontract.24
Disputes over Internet service contracts also belong to online shopping disputes with the contract’s object to be the service rather than the product. In this case, disputes arise from the signing or performance of Internet service contracts. An Internet Service Provider (ISP) offers its customers accesstotheInternet,oranInternetContentProvider(ICP)providesinformationontheInternet.25 Besides,productliabilitydisputesarisingfromonlineshoppingarealsogovernedbytheHangzhou Internet Court. After the producers, sellers of the product produce and sell the defective products, the consumers suffer a personal injury, property damage. Consequently, the disputes arising from
theliabilityoftheproducersand/orsellers.26
Itshouldbenotedherethattheonlineshoppingcontractdoesnotequaltheonlineconsumercontract.Thelatteronehasstrictrequirementsonthepartyoftheconsumerandtheseller.Toberegarded as the consumer, he shall be a natural person who is both the buyer and the end-user of the product purchased, with the only intention to fulfill personal or household use. Whereas for the seller, either tobeanaturaloralegalperson,heshallconductbusinessbehaviorthatfallswithinhistrade,business, and profession. These have led to a clear distinction between online shopping contracts and online consumercontracts,whichistheprotectionovertheconsumer.Onlywhenthebuyercouldberegarded astheconsumercouldhebeentitledtospecialprotectionfromthelaw.
Small Amount Financial Loan Contract
It refers to disputes arising from the fact that the borrower, who had signed and performed the financial loan contract with the financial institution all through the Internet, failed to repay the financial institution the principal and interest on schedule. Disputes arising from the fact that theborrower,whohadreachedthesmallloanagreementwiththefinancialinstitutionorsmallloan
24Supra,n.20, Article 2.1.
25Supra,n.20, Article 2.2.
26Supra,n.20, Article 2.4.
30 ESSAYS
Цифровоеправо.Том2, №3, 2021, с.23–45 ЦзяньинСан/Разрешениеонлайнспоровсучастиемпотребителей:опытКитая
company, failed to repay them the principal and interest on schedule; the loan amount in the small loan contract is 500,000 Chineseyuanorless.27
Internet Copyright Disputes
DisputesarisingfromtheInternetcopyrightownershipofinfringementreferstodisputesarising fromtheownership,infringementoftheInternetworks(workscreatedindigitalform,andpublished forthefirsttimeontheInternet,suchasnovels,movies,games,butnotincludingcomputersoftware program), and disputes arising from the infringement of information network transmission rights ofnon-Internetworks.28
On August 20, 2018, in the Peppa Pig Case29, the Hangzhou Internet Court sentenced two Chinese companies: Jufan Limited and Jiale Toys Industrial, to pay $ 22 000 to Peppa Pig rights holders Entertainment One UK Limited and Astley Baker David Limited for copyright infringement, and to stop producing and selling a product with the image of Peppa Pig on it. This case shows respect for equal protection of Intellectual Property. It proves that the Hangzhou Internet Court can trial caseswithforeignelementsinvolved,justasempoweredbylaw.
Internet Domain Name Disputes
ThistypeofdisputereferstothosearisingfromInternetdomainnamecontracts,Internetdomain name ownership, and infringement, including disputes arising from Internet domain name registration contracts, Internet domain name transfer contracts, Internet domain name license agreements,
Internetdomainnameownership,Internetdomainnameinfringement.30
Infringement of Personal Rights
This type of case refers to disputes arising from the Internet’s use to infringe another person’s righttoreputation,anotherperson’srighttoprivacyand/orpersonalinformation.31
First Instance Administrative Cases
CasescausedbyInternetadministrationrefertotheadministrativelitigationcasesofthefirstinstance arising from the administrative management of the relevant administrative law enforcement departments,whichimplementtheCyberSecurityLawandanyotherlaws.32
Centralized jurisdiction over Internet cases
As indicated at the beginning of this section, Internet courts are at the level of Basic People’s Courts, they exercise centralized jurisdiction over Internet cases that fall within the jurisdiction
27Supra,n.20, Article 2.3.
28Supra,n.20, Article 2.5.
29Aisilibeike Daiweisi Youxian Gongsi, Yvleyi Yingguo Youxian Gongsi Su Shantou Shi Jufan Dianzi Shangwu Youxian Gonsi, Shantou Shi Jiale Wanju Shiye Youxian Gongsi, Zhejiang Taobao Wangluo Youxian Gonsi Zhuzuoquan Qinquan Jiufen An ( ) [Astley Baker Davies Co., Ltd. & Entertainment One UK Co., Ltd. v. Jufan Electronic Business Co., Ltd. & Shantou Jiale Toy Co., Ltd. & Zhejiang Taobao Network Co., Ltd., A dispute over copyright infringement], Aug. 20, 2018, Hangzhou Internet Court0129, No. 5227, https://wenshu.court.gov. cn/website/wenshu/181107ANFZ0BXSK4/index.html?docId=cd9f9a2397244dfeaf91abd600b4996c.
30Supra,n.20, Article 2.6.
31Supra,n.20, Article 2.7.
32Supra,n.20,Article3.
ЭССЕ 31
Digital Law Journal.Vol.2, No.3, 2021,p.23–45
Jianing Sang / Internet Court on Solving Online Consumer Contract Disputes: Case of China
ofthecitieswherethesecourtslocate.Centralizedjurisdictiondoesnotequaltospecialjurisdiction that Special People’s Courts have. Therefore, centralized jurisdiction does not have the effect of exclusivityandprioritythatspecialjurisdictionhas.
Article 34 of the Judicial Interpretation of Civil Procedure Law endows parties to a contractual dispute to designate jurisdiction via a valid choice of court clause unless such a clause violates exclusive jurisdiction. Centralized jurisdiction Internet courts have does not have the effect of exclusivity.Whenpartiesofanonlineconsumercontract,forinstance,designatethejurisdictionofan offline court via a valid choice of court clause, that offline court shall hear the case rather than an Internet court. Thus, the application of centralized jurisdiction may leave a potential tension betweenInternetcourtsandofflinecourts.
Additionally, based on the classification of online disputes as afore discussed, the only criterion adopted here to distinguish jurisdiction between Internet courts and offline courts is whether thecaseinvolvestheuseofthe“Internet”.However,thetraditionalconnectingfactor,suchasdomicile, can still be applied to decide the jurisdiction of a contractual dispute (especially consumer domicile in online consumer contract disputes). Offline courts still have jurisdiction to deal with these caseseventhoughtheyinvolvetheuseoftheInternet.Meanwhile,theaforementionedillustrations of each type of Internet dispute are rather too descriptive. There lacks a standard to help courts reach a consensus on assessing: 1) whether a dispute involves the use of the Internet or not, and 2)whethertheinvolvementoftheInternethasreachedaleveltomakethejurisdictionofanInternet court more suitable than the offline court. Different courts may have different considerations over one dispute, there is a potential risk of “jurisdiction conflicts” between Internet courts and offline courts.
Thesepossiblequestionstriggeredbyapplying“centralizedjurisdiction”canbesolvedbythefollowing solutions. First, clarify the status of centralized jurisdiction, specifically in case of a valid choice of court clause. Second, on explaining what disputes shall be governed by Internet courts, focus shall be given on whether the content of the case involves the use of Internet technology on a level that makes Internet courts more suitable to hear the case than offline courts. Commonly recognized standards are in need to be established, which relies on the review of more new types anddifficultInternetdisputes.33
Process Before Trial Initiation and Acceptance of Lawsuit
Initiation of a Lawsuit Online
The initiation process is conducted completely through the Hangzhou Litigation Platform, where the parties shall go through the identity authentication process before the formal initiation of a legal procedure. The identity authentication34 is carried out at the Litigation Platform. It could be
33Z.Liu,X.Li(2019),CommentaryonthejurisdictionrulesoftheInternetCourt.BusinessandEconomicLawReview, 5, p.130.
34Theidentityauthenticationisofgreatimportanceinonlinelitigation,unlikeinofflinetrialprocedure,wheretheparties’ identities could be verified through their present. Whereas in online situation, in lack of physical contact, the account registered on the Litigation Platform take the function of identification verification. According to the Judicial InterpretationofInternetCourt,theaccountcouldonlybegrantedoncetheexclusiveidentityauthenticationwasfinishedthrough: ID verification, biometric recognition, or national unified identity authentication platform. Any behaviors conducted through that account shall be deemed as the action of the verified person, except in the case where system error happens due to technical reasons of the platform, or where the verified person is able to prove that the account has been stolen.(Supra,n.14, Article 6).
32 ESSAYS
Цифровоеправо.Том2, №3, 2021, с.23–45 ЦзяньинСан/Разрешениеонлайнспоровсучастиемпотребителей:опытКитая
done through online real-name authentication or face recognition. Offline authentication at court is also acceptable.35 Parties could choose their status in litigation according to their demands as totheplaintifforthedefendant,asshowninthefigurebelow:3637
Figure 1
Procedurefortheplaintifftofollow36
Figure 2
Procedureforthedefendanttofollow37
For the plaintiff, as indicated in figure 1, after completing the registration and logging into the account, he could choose “I am the plaintiff”, the type of lawsuit, and the cause of action. Relevant
35Supra,n.10,Article3.
36Hangzhou Internet Court. (n.d.). Guidelines for litigation. Retrieved September 13, 2021, from https://www.netcourt.gov. cn/portal/main/domain/index.htm
37Ibid.
ЭССЕ 33
Digital Law Journal.Vol.2, No.3, 2021,p.23–45
Jianing Sang / Internet Court on Solving Online Consumer Contract Disputes: Case of China
materials could directly be submitted online.38 Internet disputes have already been classified into eleven types within the jurisdiction of Hangzhou Internet Court. Specific types of disputes could be structurallycategorizedintospecificcasesandcouldbeinputintotheLitigationPlatformsystemas required.39 Therefore, the same type of cases is filed together online, the workload of the Internet courtisthereforelightened.
Partiesthatareentitledto fileonlinelitigationarenotlimitedto ChinesecitizensorChinese entities. Foreign natural persons and foreign entities can also initiate an online litigation process. On February 3rd, 2021, the Supreme People’s Court enacted the Several Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Providing Online Case Docketing Services for Parties to CrossborderLitigation (“ProvisionsforPartiesto Cross-BorderLitigation”).40 This Provisions provides foreigners, residents of the Hong Kong and Macao Special Administrative Region, residents of the Taiwan region, citizens of the Chinese mainland who habitually reside abroad or in Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan, and enterprises and organizations registered abroad in Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan docketing services of online litigation.41 The only requirements for them to file online litigation in China are:
1. Pass the identity authentication process by providing corresponding identity certification (e.g., passports);42
2.ThelanguageusedthroughouttheonlinelitigationshallbethecommonlanguageofChina,materials submitted shall use the common language of China or with a translation provided by a qualifiedtranslationcompany.43
To protect personal data in the process of submitting identity certification and other relevant materials,theJudicialInterpretationofInternetCourtsrequirestheInternetcourtlitigationplatform shallcomplywiththeCyberSecurityLawintermsofdatauseandstorage.44
Pre-trial online mediation
Inconsiderationof promotingout-of-courtdisputeresolutionto bestsuitthe parties’needs, a mediation process is set up by the Litigation Platform before the litigation procedure. The mediator manager would assign a mediator to the cases submitted for the pre-trial mediation. The mediation process proceeds online, both parties are entitled to input their intention for mediation into the “online mediation” of the Litigation Platform. However, online pre-trial mediation is not limited to the non-face-to-face procedure. In the case where both parties agree to proceed with the online mediation in video or audio form, the mediator will arrange the corresponding procedure for the parties to ensure they can have personal communication and
38Supra,n.10, Article 4.
39Supra,n.10, Article 5.
40ZuigaoRenminFayuanGuanyuWeiKuajingSusongDangshirenTigongWngshangLi’anFuwuDeRuoganGuiding()[Severalprovisionsofthesupremepeople’scourt on providing online case docketing services for parties to cross-border litigation] (promulgated by the Judicial Comm. Sup.People’sCt.,Feb.03, 2021,effectiveFeb.03, 2021),http://www.court.gov.cn/shenpan-xiangqing-286341.html(China).
41Supra,n.40, Article 1.
42Supra,n.40, Article 5.
43Supra,n.40, Article 6 and 7.
44Supra, n. 14, Article 5. Detailed regulations regarding data protection and information security, see Chapter 4 of Cyber SecurityLaw(Supra,n.17).
34 ESSAYS