COMPANY
News
HOME > COMPANY > News
Case | Does the reported product belong to the CCC catalogue? Professional judgment is respected!
Date：2022/7/22 Clicks：1087
As the supervision and management and law enforcement department, the defendant made a professional judgment on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC catalogue according to the description of the compulsory product certification catalogue in the "Definition Form". There is still room for judicial review, but the breadth, density and depth of the review should be explored for the legislative purpose of product certification, and the judicial review capacity should be restricted accordingly, unless there are obvious errors, violations of legal procedures, or violations of legislative intent, this In accordance with the principles of judicial modesty and limited review, the professional judgment of administrative agencies should be respected.
On November 5, 2020, the plaintiff Zhou reported to the defendant, the Shanghai Jing'an District Market Supervision Administration (hereinafter referred to as the Jing'an District Market Supervision Administration), that the Yamaha "UR44C sound card" purchased online had a headphone output interface and an audio power amplifier function. It belongs to the CCC certification catalog product "audio power amplifier (category 0802)", and requires Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau to punish merchants for selling products without CCC certification in accordance with the law, and give written responses to the results and rewards.
Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau has reviewed and considered that the main function of "UR44C sound card" is to provide input interface, signal mixing and sound effect processing. The device itself has no storage medium. It only provides the customer with the monitoring function of earphones, which is only for signal processing. There is no power amplification function. Audio and video processing equipment (class 0805)". This product is an audio and video recording player processing equipment without a carrier, and does not belong to the CCC compulsory certification catalogue product. Therefore, on November 25, 2020, the reply was not filed. The plaintiff refused to accept it and applied for administrative reconsideration. The defendant, Shanghai Municipal Administration for Market Regulation (hereinafter referred to as the “Shanghai Administration for Market Regulation”), made an upholding administrative reconsideration decision on June 15, 2021. Zhou still refused to accept it and sued to the court of first instance, requesting to revoke the sued reply and the sued reconsideration decision.
On October 28, 2021, the Shanghai Railway Transportation Court made a first-instance administrative judgment (2021) Hu 7101 Xingchu No. 696: to reject Zhou's claim. Zhou refused to accept it and filed an appeal. On April 8, 2022, the Shanghai No. 3 Intermediate People's Court made a second-instance administrative judgment (2022) Hu 03 Xing Zhong No. 7: the appeal was rejected and the original judgment was upheld.
The court's effective judgment held that: Complaints and reports are an important way and way for citizens, legal persons or other organizations to participate in administrative management, safeguard their own legitimate rights and interests, and supervise administrative organs to perform their duties in accordance with the law. A Zhou reported that Yamaha sold a "UR44C sound card" without a CCC certificate. After investigation, the Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau found that the product did not belong to the CCC compulsory certification catalogue, and decided not to file the case and respond to the complaint. Dissatisfied with the defendant's reply and the defendant's reconsideration decision, Zhou filed a lawsuit, involving the following disputes over the application of law:
According to Article 2 of the Administrative Litigation Law, Article 12, Paragraph 1, Item 12, Article 25, Paragraph 1, Article 49, Items 1 and 4, and the Supreme People's Court on The "Interpretation of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicable Interpretation") shall apply the provisions of Article 1, paragraph 1 and Item 10, paragraph 2, when citizens, legal persons or other organizations consider that the administrative acts of administrative organs (including Acts and omissions) infringe on their legitimate rights and interests, have actual impact on their rights and obligations, and refuse to accept the lawsuit, which falls within the scope of administrative litigation. The above-mentioned legislative and judicial interpretations have clarified the subjective judgment standard of "believing that legitimate rights and interests have been violated" and the objective judgment standard of "actually affecting rights and obligations" on the justiciability of administrative actions. For the plaintiff qualification of administrative litigation, it is clearly defined as "the counterparty of the administrative act" and "the citizen, legal person or other organization with an interest in the administrative act". Specific to the handling of complaints and reports, Article 12, Paragraph 1, Item 6 of the Administrative Litigation Law stipulates that an application for an administrative organ to perform its statutory duties of protecting personal rights, property rights and other legitimate rights and interests, and the administrative organ refuses to perform or does not respond, may file a lawsuit. Article 12, Item 5 of the "Applicable Interpretation" stipulates that in order to protect one's own legitimate rights and interests, a complaint is lodged with an administrative organ, and the administrative organ with the responsibility for handling the complaint makes or fails to handle it, and it has an interest in the administrative act. In the administrative trial practice, the judgment of the actionability of complaints and reports and the qualifications of plaintiffs depends on whether laws, regulations, and rules stipulate the right to request complaints and reports, and whether the purpose of legislative regulation protects the legitimate rights and interests of complainants.
This case involves the handling of complaints and reports of product certification violations. There are many different levels of legislation on the legal source to provide for them. Articles 54 and 55 of the "Regulations on Certification and Accreditation" stipulate that the local people's government at or above the county level will supervise the market. The management department ... supervises and manages the certification activities in accordance with the provisions of these regulations. Any unit or individual shall have the right to report any illegal act of certification and accreditation, and the local certification supervision and management department shall investigate and deal with it in a timely manner. Article 48 of the "Regulations on the Administration of Compulsory Product Certification" stipulates that any unit or individual has the right to report violations of laws and regulations in compulsory product certification activities, and the two local quality inspection bureaus shall investigate and deal with them in a timely manner. The second paragraph of Article 19 of the "Special Provisions of the State Council on Strengthening the Safety Supervision and Administration of Food and Other Products" stipulates that if the reported matter is the responsibility of the department, it shall be accepted, and shall be verified, dealt with and answered in accordance with the law. According to Articles 15, 18 and 32 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests, consumers have the right to supervise, report and sue, and operators have the security of consumers' personal and property safety. The administrative department has the duty to listen to consumers' opinions and investigate and deal with them in a timely manner. Based on the above-mentioned legislative provisions, the defendant Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau shall have the responsibility of investigating, handling and responding to complaints and reports of certification violations within its jurisdiction. The plaintiff, as a consumer, believes that the defendant has failed to perform its duties according to the law and violated its legitimate rights and interests, and brought a lawsuit against the defendant's response, which has the interest of suing, and the plaintiff is qualified.
Whether the Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau has fulfilled its statutory responsibilities for the reported matter involves the legality review of the professional judgment of the administrative organ on the reported matter, and whether the reported product "UR44C sound card" belongs to the CCC compulsory certification catalogue, involving the following disputes:
First, the defendant has the authority to make professional judgments on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC certification catalog. In this regard, this court believes that according to Articles 4, 54, 55 and 66 of the Regulations on Certification and Accreditation, Articles 3 and 40 of the Regulations on the Administration of Compulsory Product Certification Article 8 and Article 49 stipulate that the state implements a unified certification and accreditation supervision and management system. The defendant Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau is responsible for the supervision and management of compulsory product certification activities within its jurisdiction and the law enforcement investigation. Complaints and reports of illegal acts of certification shall be investigated and dealt with in accordance with the law. If the products listed in the catalog are sold without certification, they shall have the power to impose administrative penalties such as ordering corrections, fines, and confiscation of illegal gains. According to the above-mentioned legislative provisions, the defendant, as the supervision, management and law enforcement department of compulsory product certification activities, has the power to investigate and make professional judgments according to law on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC certification catalogue.
Secondly, whether the defendant makes a professional judgment on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC certification catalog, whether the court has room for judicial review. In this regard, this court believes that, according to Articles 28 and 29 of the Regulations on Certification and Accreditation, the State shall issue a unified product catalogue for products that must be certified by the certification and accreditation supervision and administration department of the State Council. Products listed in the catalogue must be certified by a certification body designated by the certification and accreditation supervision and administration department of the State Council. Article 30 of "Regulations on the Administration of Compulsory Product Certification" stipulates that the style of the certification mark is composed of basic patterns and certification types. In the basic pattern, "CCC" is the English name of "China Compulsory Certification". abbreviation. In order to further clarify the scope of application of compulsory certification products, the State Administration for Market Regulation (CNCA) promptly optimizes the compulsory product certification catalogue, regularly revises the "Definition Form", and is responsible for interpretation. As the supervision and management and law enforcement department, the defendant made a professional judgment on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC catalogue according to the description of the compulsory product certification catalogue in the "Definition Form". There is still room for judicial review, but the breadth, density and depth of the review should be explored for the legislative purpose of product certification, and the judicial review capacity should be restricted accordingly, unless there are obvious errors, violations of legal procedures, or violations of legislative intent, this In accordance with the principles of judicial modesty and limited review, the professional judgment of administrative agencies should be respected.
Thirdly, whether the defendant makes a professional judgment that the reported product does not belong to the CCC certification catalog, and whether the justification is sufficient. In this regard, this court believes that the defendant has provided sufficient facts and basis for the judgment that the reported product "UR44C sound card" does not belong to the category 08 product catalog after investigation and combined with the description of the 0802 and 0805 product catalogues in the "Definition Form". be corroborated. In addition, the defendant provided an example of the China Quality Certification Center (CQC) not accepting the application for UR44C product certification, as well as a screening example jointly compiled by the city's market supervision and law enforcement department and the certification agency. The above judgment examples reflect the city's regulatory law enforcement department and The general understanding of the certification body on the description of the category 08 product catalogue in the "Definition Table", as well as the professional judgment of whether "UR44C sound card" can be included in the catalogue in law enforcement and certification practice, the defendant uses this to support its judgment. support. In addition, in product certification activities, the market supervision law enforcement department and the certification body shall follow the legislative normative purpose within their respective responsibilities, give a reasonable explanation to the "Definition Form", and make professional judgments in the application of individual cases, and cooperate with the State Administration for Market Regulation ( CNCA), as the main body of the formulation of mandatory norms, reserves the final right to interpret the "Definition Form", which does not conflict. The plaintiff insists that the reported product conforms to the description of category 0802 products in the "Definition Form", and that the CCC compulsory certification should be carried out according to the law. It is only a personal understanding and judgment of a consumer with certain professional knowledge. This court does not support the lawsuit, claiming that the defendant failed to perform the duty of investigation and handling of the reported matter according to law, and the reasons are not sufficient.
In addition, the defendant Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau's response to the action procedure was legal, and the defendant's Shanghai Market Supervision Bureau's decision to uphold the defendant's reconsideration has clear facts, correct applicable laws, and legal procedures. To sum up, the plaintiff's claim has insufficient grounds, and it is not inappropriate for the original judgment to reject the plaintiff's claim and it can be upheld. Accordingly, the judgment is as follows: the appeal is dismissed and the original judgment is upheld.
First instance: Shanghai Railway Transportation Court (2021) Hu 7101 Xingchu No. 696
Second instance: Shanghai No. 3 Intermediate People's Court (2022) Hu 03 Xing Zhong No. 7
On November 5, 2020, the plaintiff Zhou reported to the defendant, the Shanghai Jing'an District Market Supervision Administration (hereinafter referred to as the Jing'an District Market Supervision Administration), that the Yamaha "UR44C sound card" purchased online had a headphone output interface and an audio power amplifier function. It belongs to the CCC certification catalog product "audio power amplifier (category 0802)", and requires Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau to punish merchants for selling products without CCC certification in accordance with the law, and give written responses to the results and rewards.
Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau has reviewed and considered that the main function of "UR44C sound card" is to provide input interface, signal mixing and sound effect processing. The device itself has no storage medium. It only provides the customer with the monitoring function of earphones, which is only for signal processing. There is no power amplification function. Audio and video processing equipment (class 0805)". This product is an audio and video recording player processing equipment without a carrier, and does not belong to the CCC compulsory certification catalogue product. Therefore, on November 25, 2020, the reply was not filed. The plaintiff refused to accept it and applied for administrative reconsideration. The defendant, Shanghai Municipal Administration for Market Regulation (hereinafter referred to as the “Shanghai Administration for Market Regulation”), made an upholding administrative reconsideration decision on June 15, 2021. Zhou still refused to accept it and sued to the court of first instance, requesting to revoke the sued reply and the sued reconsideration decision.
On October 28, 2021, the Shanghai Railway Transportation Court made a first-instance administrative judgment (2021) Hu 7101 Xingchu No. 696: to reject Zhou's claim. Zhou refused to accept it and filed an appeal. On April 8, 2022, the Shanghai No. 3 Intermediate People's Court made a second-instance administrative judgment (2022) Hu 03 Xing Zhong No. 7: the appeal was rejected and the original judgment was upheld.
Referee analysis
The court's effective judgment held that: Complaints and reports are an important way and way for citizens, legal persons or other organizations to participate in administrative management, safeguard their own legitimate rights and interests, and supervise administrative organs to perform their duties in accordance with the law. A Zhou reported that Yamaha sold a "UR44C sound card" without a CCC certificate. After investigation, the Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau found that the product did not belong to the CCC compulsory certification catalogue, and decided not to file the case and respond to the complaint. Dissatisfied with the defendant's reply and the defendant's reconsideration decision, Zhou filed a lawsuit, involving the following disputes over the application of law:
I. The suitability of the response to complaints and reports and the qualifications of the plaintiff
According to Article 2 of the Administrative Litigation Law, Article 12, Paragraph 1, Item 12, Article 25, Paragraph 1, Article 49, Items 1 and 4, and the Supreme People's Court on The "Interpretation of the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicable Interpretation") shall apply the provisions of Article 1, paragraph 1 and Item 10, paragraph 2, when citizens, legal persons or other organizations consider that the administrative acts of administrative organs (including Acts and omissions) infringe on their legitimate rights and interests, have actual impact on their rights and obligations, and refuse to accept the lawsuit, which falls within the scope of administrative litigation. The above-mentioned legislative and judicial interpretations have clarified the subjective judgment standard of "believing that legitimate rights and interests have been violated" and the objective judgment standard of "actually affecting rights and obligations" on the justiciability of administrative actions. For the plaintiff qualification of administrative litigation, it is clearly defined as "the counterparty of the administrative act" and "the citizen, legal person or other organization with an interest in the administrative act". Specific to the handling of complaints and reports, Article 12, Paragraph 1, Item 6 of the Administrative Litigation Law stipulates that an application for an administrative organ to perform its statutory duties of protecting personal rights, property rights and other legitimate rights and interests, and the administrative organ refuses to perform or does not respond, may file a lawsuit. Article 12, Item 5 of the "Applicable Interpretation" stipulates that in order to protect one's own legitimate rights and interests, a complaint is lodged with an administrative organ, and the administrative organ with the responsibility for handling the complaint makes or fails to handle it, and it has an interest in the administrative act. In the administrative trial practice, the judgment of the actionability of complaints and reports and the qualifications of plaintiffs depends on whether laws, regulations, and rules stipulate the right to request complaints and reports, and whether the purpose of legislative regulation protects the legitimate rights and interests of complainants.
This case involves the handling of complaints and reports of product certification violations. There are many different levels of legislation on the legal source to provide for them. Articles 54 and 55 of the "Regulations on Certification and Accreditation" stipulate that the local people's government at or above the county level will supervise the market. The management department ... supervises and manages the certification activities in accordance with the provisions of these regulations. Any unit or individual shall have the right to report any illegal act of certification and accreditation, and the local certification supervision and management department shall investigate and deal with it in a timely manner. Article 48 of the "Regulations on the Administration of Compulsory Product Certification" stipulates that any unit or individual has the right to report violations of laws and regulations in compulsory product certification activities, and the two local quality inspection bureaus shall investigate and deal with them in a timely manner. The second paragraph of Article 19 of the "Special Provisions of the State Council on Strengthening the Safety Supervision and Administration of Food and Other Products" stipulates that if the reported matter is the responsibility of the department, it shall be accepted, and shall be verified, dealt with and answered in accordance with the law. According to Articles 15, 18 and 32 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests, consumers have the right to supervise, report and sue, and operators have the security of consumers' personal and property safety. The administrative department has the duty to listen to consumers' opinions and investigate and deal with them in a timely manner. Based on the above-mentioned legislative provisions, the defendant Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau shall have the responsibility of investigating, handling and responding to complaints and reports of certification violations within its jurisdiction. The plaintiff, as a consumer, believes that the defendant has failed to perform its duties according to the law and violated its legitimate rights and interests, and brought a lawsuit against the defendant's response, which has the interest of suing, and the plaintiff is qualified.
2. Judicial review of complaints and reports involving professional judgment
Whether the Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau has fulfilled its statutory responsibilities for the reported matter involves the legality review of the professional judgment of the administrative organ on the reported matter, and whether the reported product "UR44C sound card" belongs to the CCC compulsory certification catalogue, involving the following disputes:
First, the defendant has the authority to make professional judgments on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC certification catalog. In this regard, this court believes that according to Articles 4, 54, 55 and 66 of the Regulations on Certification and Accreditation, Articles 3 and 40 of the Regulations on the Administration of Compulsory Product Certification Article 8 and Article 49 stipulate that the state implements a unified certification and accreditation supervision and management system. The defendant Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau is responsible for the supervision and management of compulsory product certification activities within its jurisdiction and the law enforcement investigation. Complaints and reports of illegal acts of certification shall be investigated and dealt with in accordance with the law. If the products listed in the catalog are sold without certification, they shall have the power to impose administrative penalties such as ordering corrections, fines, and confiscation of illegal gains. According to the above-mentioned legislative provisions, the defendant, as the supervision, management and law enforcement department of compulsory product certification activities, has the power to investigate and make professional judgments according to law on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC certification catalogue.
Secondly, whether the defendant makes a professional judgment on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC certification catalog, whether the court has room for judicial review. In this regard, this court believes that, according to Articles 28 and 29 of the Regulations on Certification and Accreditation, the State shall issue a unified product catalogue for products that must be certified by the certification and accreditation supervision and administration department of the State Council. Products listed in the catalogue must be certified by a certification body designated by the certification and accreditation supervision and administration department of the State Council. Article 30 of "Regulations on the Administration of Compulsory Product Certification" stipulates that the style of the certification mark is composed of basic patterns and certification types. In the basic pattern, "CCC" is the English name of "China Compulsory Certification". abbreviation. In order to further clarify the scope of application of compulsory certification products, the State Administration for Market Regulation (CNCA) promptly optimizes the compulsory product certification catalogue, regularly revises the "Definition Form", and is responsible for interpretation. As the supervision and management and law enforcement department, the defendant made a professional judgment on whether the reported product belongs to the CCC catalogue according to the description of the compulsory product certification catalogue in the "Definition Form". There is still room for judicial review, but the breadth, density and depth of the review should be explored for the legislative purpose of product certification, and the judicial review capacity should be restricted accordingly, unless there are obvious errors, violations of legal procedures, or violations of legislative intent, this In accordance with the principles of judicial modesty and limited review, the professional judgment of administrative agencies should be respected.
Thirdly, whether the defendant makes a professional judgment that the reported product does not belong to the CCC certification catalog, and whether the justification is sufficient. In this regard, this court believes that the defendant has provided sufficient facts and basis for the judgment that the reported product "UR44C sound card" does not belong to the category 08 product catalog after investigation and combined with the description of the 0802 and 0805 product catalogues in the "Definition Form". be corroborated. In addition, the defendant provided an example of the China Quality Certification Center (CQC) not accepting the application for UR44C product certification, as well as a screening example jointly compiled by the city's market supervision and law enforcement department and the certification agency. The above judgment examples reflect the city's regulatory law enforcement department and The general understanding of the certification body on the description of the category 08 product catalogue in the "Definition Table", as well as the professional judgment of whether "UR44C sound card" can be included in the catalogue in law enforcement and certification practice, the defendant uses this to support its judgment. support. In addition, in product certification activities, the market supervision law enforcement department and the certification body shall follow the legislative normative purpose within their respective responsibilities, give a reasonable explanation to the "Definition Form", and make professional judgments in the application of individual cases, and cooperate with the State Administration for Market Regulation ( CNCA), as the main body of the formulation of mandatory norms, reserves the final right to interpret the "Definition Form", which does not conflict. The plaintiff insists that the reported product conforms to the description of category 0802 products in the "Definition Form", and that the CCC compulsory certification should be carried out according to the law. It is only a personal understanding and judgment of a consumer with certain professional knowledge. This court does not support the lawsuit, claiming that the defendant failed to perform the duty of investigation and handling of the reported matter according to law, and the reasons are not sufficient.
In addition, the defendant Jing'an District Market Supervision Bureau's response to the action procedure was legal, and the defendant's Shanghai Market Supervision Bureau's decision to uphold the defendant's reconsideration has clear facts, correct applicable laws, and legal procedures. To sum up, the plaintiff's claim has insufficient grounds, and it is not inappropriate for the original judgment to reject the plaintiff's claim and it can be upheld. Accordingly, the judgment is as follows: the appeal is dismissed and the original judgment is upheld.
【Case Index】
First instance: Shanghai Railway Transportation Court (2021) Hu 7101 Xingchu No. 696
Second instance: Shanghai No. 3 Intermediate People's Court (2022) Hu 03 Xing Zhong No. 7
Add.：Room703、705/7F, Development Building, Tian An Hi-Teck Ecological Park, No.555 North Road Panyu Avenue, Panyu District, Guangzhou City, 511400, China
Tel.：020 - 39211670 Fax：020 - 39211640 E-mail:info@certitek.cn