All Articles in Labelling and packaging
-
-
French Anti-Waste Law provides for new marketing rules
-
Exaggerating will get you busted – or is this exaggerating?
-
Watch out for the small print!
-
ASA blogger ruling sheds light on “control” definition
-
CAP note on weight loss claims
CAP guidance on weight loss food ads. CAP has once more issued guidance for advertisers in the food sector on how to ensure weight loss claims are responsible and compliant. Stefania Grosso reports.
-
Competitor awarded damages for misleading medicinal claim
When a food supplement company challenged a competitor’s product name as a misleading medicine claim, was it also able to claim damages through Italian courts? Marialaura Boni reports.
-
New tobacco packaging controls come into force
Following an unsuccessful last-ditch court challenge by cigarette manufacturers, plain packaging for all cigarette packs is now UK law. The tobacco industry brands the regime disproportionate and says it will appeal. Ben Dunham reports.
-
M&S and Auchan fight over use of “Simply”
ISMS owns the Auchan supermarket brand and operates over 2000 “Simply Market” stores in France and beyond. It claimed M&S infringed its trade mark by sales in France of “Simply M&S” products. Vincent le Bars of Osborne Clarke Paris reports.
-
ASA probes Latvian “Pranamat Sales” site
Online ads for “ECO acupressure mats” claimed they “helped to relieve stress, reduce headache and back pain and improve circulation.” On what basis could the ASA have jurisdiction over a Latvian website? Daisy Jones reports.
-
Duesseldorf court finds “Einhorn” condom claims misleading
The challenged pack promised “1 package, containing 7 pieces, equivalent to up to 21 orgasms.” Competitor Fair Squared filed for an interim injunction, alleging this was misleading. Stephan Bahner of Osborne Clarke Cologne reports on the court’s decision.
-
BIS report on copycat packaging – are brand owners moving closer to or further away from direct enforcement rights against lookalikes under the CPRs?
The Government has reported on whether brand owners should be able to take direct action against lookalike products under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. Has this pleased anti lookalike lobbyist the British Brands Group? Barney Sich reports.
