Kenya, Sept. 16 -- A Shanghai court has ordered two teenagers to pay 2.2m yuan for Haidilao hotpot incident that shocked the nation earlier this year, holding the minors and their parents accountable for a viral prank gone wrong. The ruling, handed down by the Huangpu District People's Court on September 12, 2025, stems from a February 24 episode where the 17-year-olds, identified only by surnames Tang and Wu, urinated into a simmering pot of broth at a Haidilao outlet on Shanghai's Bund waterfront.
The duo, who were intoxicated at the time, climbed onto a dining table in a private room and filmed their act. Days later, Wu posted the video online, igniting a firestorm of public outrage across Chinese social media platforms like Weibo. The clip amassed millions of views, with netizens decrying the "disgusting" behavior and calling for severe repercussions.
Haidilao, China's premier hotpot chain renowned for its exceptional service, responded swiftly to mitigate the fallout. The company replaced all cookware and tableware at the branch, conducted thorough cleaning and disinfection, and extended generous compensation to over 4,000 diners who visited between February 24 and March 8. Each affected customer received a full refund plus cash equivalent to 10 times their bill, totaling millions in payouts.
No evidence suggests anyone consumed the tainted broth, but the incident eroded trust in the restaurant's hygiene standards. In March, Haidilao escalated the matter by suing Tang, Wu, and their parents, demanding a public apology and over 23 million yuan in damages for operational disruptions, reputational harm, and customer compensations.
The court's decision broke down the 2.2 million yuan penalty as follows: 2 million yuan for business and reputational losses to Haidilao and its Shanghai subsidiary, 130,000 yuan for tableware replacement and cleaning costs, and 70,000 yuan in legal fees. Judges ruled the teens' actions constituted "acts of insult" that infringed on the companies' property rights and caused widespread public discomfort.
Crucially, the court rejected Haidilao's claim for the full customer compensation amount, deeming the 10x refunds a "voluntary business decision" rather than a direct liability for the defendants. "This was a reasonable measure to restore consumer confidence," the verdict stated, as reported by state media like People's Daily.
The parents of both boys were found negligent in their guardianship duties, bearing joint responsibility for the payment. Where the minors have personal assets, those must be used first; any shortfall falls to the families. The six defendants-Tang, Wu, and their four parents-must also issue public apologies in designated newspapers, with the teens' identities protected due to their age.
This case has sparked broader discussions on parental accountability and youth behavior in China's digital age. Legal experts hail it as a "wake-up call," emphasizing how social media amplifies reckless acts. "In an era of viral stunts, this ruling underscores that pranks have real-world costs," said a commentator in the Shanghai Observer.
Haidilao, founded in 1994 in Sichuan's Jianyang city, has ballooned into a global powerhouse with over 1,300 outlets across China and expansions in more than 10 countries, including Singapore, the US, and the UK.
The chain's hallmark is its over-the-top customer service: complimentary manicures for women, candy floss for kids, and noodle-dancing waiters to entertain queues. This incident tested that family-friendly image but ultimately reinforced the brand's commitment to hygiene and goodwill.
Public reaction remains polarized. While many applaud the verdict for deterring similar antics, others question if the penalty is proportionate for minors. On Weibo, one user posted: "Finally, some sense-parents need to step up." The teens were previously detained administratively by police, but no criminal charges were filed.
As Haidilao continues its aggressive growth, aiming for even more international footprints, this saga serves as a cautionary tale. In a nation where food safety scandals can topple empires, the chain's proactive response likely preserved its reputation. For the families involved, the financial burden-equivalent to about US$308,000 or Sh36 million in Kenyan shillings-marks a harsh lesson in consequences.
The ruling is a first-instance decision, leaving room for appeals, but it signals China's courts are cracking down on online mischief that harms businesses. Whether this deters future "challenges" or inspires copycats remains to be seen, but one thing's clear: the cost of a bad prank just skyrocketed.
Published by HT Digital Content Services with permission from Bana Kenya.