Click the case name for better results:

Lidl Belgium GmbH and Co KG v Etablissementen Franz Colruyt NV: ECJ 19 Sep 2006

ECJ (Approximation of Laws) – Directives 84/450/EEC and 97/55/EC – Misleading advertising – Comparative advertising – Conditions under which comparative advertising is permitted – Comparison of the general level of the prices charged by chains of stores – Comparison of the prices of a selection of products. Citations: C-356/04, [2006] EUECJ C-356/04, [2007] 1 CMLR … Continue reading Lidl Belgium GmbH and Co KG v Etablissementen Franz Colruyt NV: ECJ 19 Sep 2006

De Landtsheer Emmanuel v Comite Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne: ECJ 19 Apr 2007

ECJ Approximation of Laws – Directives 84/450/EEC and 97/55/EC – Comparative advertising Identifying a competitor or the goods or services offered by a competitor Goods or services satisfying the same needs or with the same purpose Reference to designations of origin. Citations: [2007] EUECJ C-381/05, [2007] ECR I-3115, [2007] Bus LR 1484 Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading De Landtsheer Emmanuel v Comite Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne: ECJ 19 Apr 2007

Pippig Augenoptik GmbH and Co. KG v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 8 Apr 2003

ECJ Judgment – Approximation of laws – Directives 84/450/EEC and 97/55/EC – Misleading advertising – Conditions for comparative advertising to be lawful Citations: C-44/01, [2003] EUECJ C-44/01, [2003] ECR I-3095, [2004] All ER (EC) 1156, [2004] 1 CMLR 39 Links: Bailii Statutes: Directive 84/450/EEC, Directive 97/55/EC Cited by: Cited – Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd, Regina (on … Continue reading Pippig Augenoptik GmbH and Co. KG v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 8 Apr 2003

Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA: ECJ 18 Nov 2010

ECJ Directives 84/450/EEC and 97/55/EC – Conditions under which a comparative advertising is permitted – Price comparison based on selection of food products marketed by two competing retail store chains – Goods meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose – Misleading advertising – Comparison based on a verifiable featureThe court summarised the … Continue reading Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA: ECJ 18 Nov 2010

O2 Holdings Limited and O2 (UK) Limited v Hutchison 3G UK Limited: ECJ 12 Jun 2008

Use of trade mark in coparative advertising Europa Trade marks Directive 89/104/EEC Article 5(1) Exclusive rights of the trade mark proprietor Use of a sign identical with, or similar to, a mark in a comparative advertisement Limitation of the effects of a trade mark – Comparative advertising Directives 84/450/EEC and 97/55/EC Article 3a(1) Conditions under … Continue reading O2 Holdings Limited and O2 (UK) Limited v Hutchison 3G UK Limited: ECJ 12 Jun 2008

Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd and others v Vetplus Ltd: CA 20 Jun 2007

The claimants appealed refusal of an order restricting comparative advertising materials for the defendant’s competing veterinary medicine. The claimant said that the rule against prior restraint applicable to defamation and other tort proceedings did not apply to trade mark infringement. Held: The rule against prior restraint applied to actions involving reputation, but did not apply … Continue reading Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd and others v Vetplus Ltd: CA 20 Jun 2007

Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA: ECJ 7 Sep 2010

ECJ Opinion – Environment And Consumers – Comparative Advertising – Comparison of prices that a competing supermarket chain – Products meeting the same needs or having a common goal. Judges: Mengozzi AG Citations: C-159/09, [2010] EUECJ C-159/09 Links: Bailii Statutes: Directive 84/450/EEC Cited by: Opinion – Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA ECJ 18-Nov-2010 ECJ … Continue reading Lidl SNC v Vierzon Distribution SA: ECJ 7 Sep 2010

De Landtsheer Emmanuel SA v Comite Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne and Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin SA: ECJ 30 Nov 2006

ECJ (Approximation Of Laws) Opinion – Directives 84/450/EEC and 97/55/EEC – Comparative advertising – Concept – Identification of a competitor or of the goods or services offered by a competitor – Conditions governing the lawfulness of a comparison – Goods or services meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose – Reference to … Continue reading De Landtsheer Emmanuel SA v Comite Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne and Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin SA: ECJ 30 Nov 2006

Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others: ComC 24 Apr 2008

The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the breach of the overdraft limits. Held: The relevant terms were not exempt from assessment … Continue reading Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others: ComC 24 Apr 2008

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