As of January 10th 2016, Companies will be allowed to use
competitor names and or trademarks in comparative
The regulation on Commercial Advertisements and Unfair
Commercial Practices (the "Regulation"),
which permits comparative advertisements entered into force on
January 10th, 2015, although the Regulation prohibited direct
references to competitor names or trademarks in comparative
advertisements by postponing the effective date of Article
8/2. which will come into effect on January 10th 2016.
The regulation allows advertisers to suggest the supremacy of
their products and or services by using competitor names,
trademarks, logos, brands or other distinguishing marks,
expressions as comparisons.
It is crucial to bear in mind that comparative advertisements
using competitiors as a comparison, will only be deemed lawful if
the advertisement meets the criteria in accordance with Article 8/2
of the Regulation as follows:
They must not be misleading and
They must not cause unfair
The goods or services compared, must
have the same qualifications and respond to the same consumer
demand or need.
The issue compared must be beneficial
to the consumer,
One or more material, essential,
verifiable and typical properties of the compared goods or
services, including the price, must be compared in an objective
Assertions based on objective,
measurable and numeric data must be proved by scientific tests,
reports or documents.
They must not be discrediting or
denigrating the competitors' intellectual and industrial
property rights, commercial name, company name, other
distinguishing marks, goods, services, activities and other
When comparing goods or services
whose origin is indicated, goods or services compared must be from
the same geographic origin,
They must not cause confusion between
advertisers' and competitors' brand, commercial name,
company name or other distinguishing marks and goods or
It is noteworthy to mention that the practice and precedents of
this broad criteria are still under development. Advertisers should
be very cautious while using competitors name, brands or trademarks
within comparative advertisements, due to the fact, that the lack
of any single criteria within the advertisement, may lead
substantial monetary fines or legal action and also the removal of
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The High Court held, in The Software Incubator v Computer Associates, that a supply of commoditised software is a sale of goods for the purposes of the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993.
Hotel proprietors are strictly liable, without proof of negligence, for the loss of property brought to the hotel by their guests, unless they can show that the loss resulted from the guest's own negligence.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).