23-Year Consumer Dispute Over 'Expired Dates' Unravels Due to German Language Misunderstanding
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has set aside a 2014 compensation order in a long-running consumer dispute, citing a fundamental linguistic error in interpreting German labeling on dates. The case, which began in 2003 with allegations of food poisoning, collapsed after the commission determined that the German phrase "Mindestens Haltbar Bis" indicates a "best before" date rather than an expiry date.
Linguistic Error Overturns Consumer Victory
A bench comprising NCDRC president Justice A P Sahi and Member Bharat Kumar held that the entire case rested on a misinterpretation of the German language labeling on the product. The commission consulted Collins dictionary and found that "Mindestens Haltbar Bis" translates to "at least durable till," representing shelf life rather than an expiry date.
The bench emphasized: "The words used in the instructions are not the date of expiry but the period of durability or shelf life. An inference can be drawn that the indication of the date is to depict 'best before' as the duration period."
Case Background and Original Verdict
The dispute originated in Chennai in April 2003 when a software professional purchased "Masafatl wet dates" from Food World Supermarkets Limited. The consumer alleged that after consuming eight to ten dates on May 14, 2003, he developed severe stomach pain, breathing difficulties, and gastritis, requiring hospitalization from May 14 to 16, 2003.
Upon recovery, the complainant inspected the packaging and noticed German language labeling that he interpreted as indicating the dates had expired in February 2002. He claimed familiarity with German due to professional training in Germany during 1993-94.
In 2014, the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission awarded Rs 2 lakh as compensation for injury to the public at large (to be paid to a cancer institute), along with Rs 38,653 for medical expenses, Rs 20,000 for mental agony, and litigation costs.
Key Findings That Led to Reversal
The NCDRC identified several critical flaws in the original case:
- Linguistic Misunderstanding: The commission clarified that the German word for expiry or termination of time period is "Abgelaugfen," not "Mindestens Haltbar Bis." The latter phrase specifically indicates shelf life or "best before" date.
- Insufficient Medical Evidence: The consumer failed to produce documents proving hospitalization at Apollo Hospital in Chennai or medical treatment expenses. No pathological or medical reports confirmed gastroenteritis was caused by date consumption.
- Procedural Flaws in Food Testing: Two food analysis reports from June and July 2003 were obtained without retailer involvement or notice. Neither report established that tested samples came from the same packet or batch consumed by the complainant.
- Inconsistent Test Results: One report mentioned presence of insects while another noted fermented odor, creating inconsistency despite both declaring samples unfit for consumption.
- Storage and Preservation Issues: No evidence showed how dates were stored between purchase and consumption, or how samples were preserved before testing.
Consumer's Claims and Commission's Observations
The NCDRC noted several implausible aspects of the consumer's claims. The commission found it "little surprising" that the complainant consumed about ten dates without noticing any unusual odor or insects, especially since consumption occurred more than a month after purchase.
The bench observed: "It does not look probable that the consumer would have missed the smell of any odour or the presence of any insects when he consumed quite several dates on May 14, 2003."
Additionally, the consumer's claim that he could decode the German labeling due to professional training in Germany during 1993-94 was undermined by the commission's finding that his interpretation was linguistically incorrect.
Final Order and Implications
While setting aside the 2014 order against the supermarket, the NCDRC ordered a refund of the deposited Rs 1 lakh amount with interest. The commission emphasized that the state consumer commission's conclusion suffered from the same linguistic "infirmity" in assigning expiry meaning to German words that actually indicate durability.
This case highlights the importance of accurate translation and interpretation in consumer disputes involving foreign language labeling, particularly for imported food products. It also underscores the necessity of proper evidence collection and procedural compliance in consumer complaints.
