Smithkline Beecham Plc and Advertising Standards Authority: Admn 21 Dec 2000

The appellants sold a soft drink. They advertised it using a toothbrush as part of the image. They also said ‘Ribena Toothkind does not encourage tooth decay’, and cited support from the British Dental Association. The Authority held that this suggested that the drink had health giving qualities, and banned the advertisements. The company appealed. The Authority relied on a report by an expert who had allied himself with complainants against the company beforehand.
Held: The independence of experts in such procedures is vital. The person of whom complaint was made acted as a consultee only. This court must act as the hypothetical observer, the reasonable man, and assess whether in any case there has in fact been a real danger, risk or possibility of unjust bias. There was no such risk apparent here. The adjudication stood.

Judges:

Mr Justice Hunt

Citations:

[2000] EWHC Admin 442

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedLocabail (UK) Ltd v Bayfield Properties Ltd and Others (No 3) ChD 29-Feb-2000
It can be proper to award costs against a third party to an action where his behaviour had fallen short of strictly maintaining the action. Here a husband had funded his wife’s defence knowing that she would be unable to support any order for costs . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Health

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.140259