Yamay's ban on food purchased outside its amusement park ruled in violation of the Fair Trade Law
Case:
Yamay's ban on food purchased outside its amusement park ruled in violation of the Fair Trade Law
Key Words:
food purchased elsewhere, amusement park
Reference:
Fair Trade Commission Decision of October 5, 2000 (the 465 Commissioners' Meeting); Disposition (89) Kung Tzu No. 164
Industry:
amusement park (8702)
Relevant Laws:
Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law
Summary:
1. Although its park attractions cover an area of 5.5 hectares and tourists' average length of stay in the park is well more than five hours on holidays (five hours on normal weekdays), Yamay International Development Corp. ("Yamay") made it a policy that no foods and beverages purchased outside its amusement park could be brought in for consumption except for water, mineral water and baby foods. A complaint by consumers alleging Yamay of violating the Fair Trade Law was forwarded to the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) from the Consumer Protection Committee. Upon receiving the complaint, the FTC took the initiative to investigate the case.
2. Yamay banned foods and drinks purchased elsewhere from its amusement park on grounds of safety, hygiene, clarification of responsibility, and risk reduction. However, it is not difficult at all for the FTC to find convincing counterarguments against those grounds, thus weakening Yamay's arguments. For example, fragile containers such as glass ones do raise safety concerns, while foil-lined soft drinks containers should not. If, as it claimed, colored drinks brought in by its customers might contaminate pools, thereby compromising other customers' rights to use of the pools, those sold by the park pose the same threat. Contamination caused by certain foods may be difficult to clean up, but it seems hard to see why all foods should be banned on this ground. Although the park could control conditions of food consumption within its boundaries, customers could still fall ill in the park because of food poisoning since they have the freedom to exit the park for meals at any time. The arguments made by Yamay do not reasonably support its ban on foods and drinks purchased elsewhere outside its amusement park.
3. Furthermore, Yamay requires customers to leave foods and beverages purchased outside the park in lockers near the park entry before entering. Given that the park covers an area as large as 5.5 hectares and that the average stay of customers in the park amounts to at least five hours, the customers will avoid leaving the park for food. At the same time, Yamay legitimately sells food in the park because its registered business operations include foods, beverages retailing and restaurants. However, what customers pay for the park tickets does not cover food consumption. The virtually comprehensive ban on foods and drinks purchased outside the park leads to the elimination of competition between sellers inside and outside the park, and there are no reasonable grounds for asserting the necessity of this ban. Considering the vastness of the park, the ban could easily produce the effect of forcing customers to buy and consume foods sold in the park, even though customers still enjoy the freedom to go outside the park for foods and drinks.
4. To sum up, Yamay's ban on foods from outside the park could not be reasonably accounted for by safety, hygiene, clarification of responsibility, and risk reduction as it argued. The fact that Yamay also sells foods and beverages in the park was deemed an inappropriate attempt to suppress customers' freedom of choice, which was ruled by the FTC in violation of Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law, and Yamay shall be fined NT$50,000. The price list of the foods and beverages offered by Yamay did not help in answering the FTC's questions regarding the case.
Appendix:
Yamay International Development Corp.'s Uniform Invoice Number: 96867183 Summarized by Chen Jiunn Ting; Supervised by Lin Yow Ching