餐饮业“禁止自带酒水”条款的存与废——对最高人民法院答复的质疑  

Existence and Abolishment of “No Bring Your Own” in Restaurant Industry——A Doubt on the Reply of Supreme People's Court

作　　者：颜辉[1] 蒋杂云 

机构地区：[1]扬州大学法学院,江苏扬州225009 [2]扬州市江都区人民法院,江苏扬州225202

出　　处：《温州职业技术学院学报》2015年第1期73-76,96,共5页Journal of Wenzhou Polytechnic

摘　　要：最高人民法院将"禁止自带酒水"定性为"霸王条款"之后,引起诸多争议,也引发消费者剩余减少、消费者成本增加等诸多负面效应。"禁止自带酒水"的实质是经营要约行为,并没有侵犯消费者自由选择权。为化解酒水之争,应转变消费者的消费观念,改善企业经营理念,同时建立行业规范的审查机制。The Supreme People＇s Court classifies ＂No Bring Your Own＂ as the ＂imparity clause＂, which sparkes widespread controversy. Meanwhile, some negative effects appear, including the reduction of consumption and the increase of consumer＇s cost. The fact of ＂No Bring Your Own＂ is business offer, and it does not infringe consumers＇ right of free option. To solve the problem, it is important to change the concept of consumers＇ consumption and businesses＇ management and establish supervision system of the industry.

关 键 词：餐饮业 禁止自带酒水 消费者 自由选择权 

分 类 号：D922.294[政治法律—经济法学]