Click the case name for better results:

Posteshop – Divisione Franchising Kipoint v Autorita Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato: ECJ 13 Mar 2014

ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2006/114/EC – Concepts of ‘misleading advertising’ and ‘comparative advertising’ – National legislation providing that misleading advertising and unlawful comparative advertising are two separate unlawful acts C.G. Fernlund, P C-52/13, [2014] EUECJ C-52/13 Bailii Directive 2006/114/EC European, Media Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.522492

Carrefour Hypermarches SAS v ITM Alimentaire International SASU: ECJ 8 Feb 2017

Misleading adverts in Europe (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Comparative advertising – Directive 2006/114/EC – Article 4 – Directive 2005/29/EC – Article 7 – Objective price comparison – Misleading omission – Advertising comparing the prices of goods sold in shops having different sizes or formats – Permissibility – Material information – Degree of … Continue reading Carrefour Hypermarches SAS v ITM Alimentaire International SASU: ECJ 8 Feb 2017

Belgian Electronic Sorting Technology Nv v Bert Peelaers: ECJ 11 Jul 2013

best_bpECJ072013 ECJ Directives 84/450/EEC and 2006/114/EC – Misleading and comparative advertising – Definition of ‘advertising’ – Registration and use of a domain name – Use of metatags in a website’s metadata Ilesic P C-657/11, [2013] EUECJ C-657/11, [2013] WLR(D) 275 Bailii, WLRD Directive 2006/114/EC, Directive 84/450/EEC European, Media Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.512334

Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Independent Reviewer of Advertising Standards Authority Adjudications: Admn 10 Nov 2014

The two supermarkets had price matching comparison schemes. Sainburys complained that the Independent Reviewer’s decsion that the ASA’s response to is complant as to the Tesco scheme was itself flawed. They had complained that the selections for comparison made by Tesco were of a lower quality. The independent reviewer had acknowledged the different elements of … Continue reading Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Independent Reviewer of Advertising Standards Authority Adjudications: Admn 10 Nov 2014

Tiscali UK Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc: QBD 16 Dec 2008

The claimant internet provider claimed damages against the defendant who it said had written to its clients making false assertions about the claimant. An earlier defamation claim had been struck out, but the claimant now alleged interference with its business by unlawful means. Held: While the allegations were novel the amendments were allowed. Eady J … Continue reading Tiscali UK Ltd v British Telecommunications Plc: QBD 16 Dec 2008