...
首页> 外文期刊>Intellectual Property Decisions >Sainsbury's v Tesco: price promises under the spotlight
【24h】

Sainsbury's v Tesco: price promises under the spotlight

机译:塞恩斯伯里诉特易购案:价格承诺备受关注

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

A rare example of an application for judicial review of a ruling of the Advertising Standards Authority ("ASA") has emphasised the difficulties brands can sometimes face when seeking to challenge comparative advertising by their competitors. In R (Sainsbury's Supermarkets Limited) v The Independent Reviewer, Sainsbury's sought to challenge a finding by the ASA in respect of Tesco's well-known 'Price Promise' advertising campaign. In particular, Sainsbury's claimed that certain products offered by Tesco did not satisfy the UK provisions implementing Article 4(b) the Comparative Advertising Directive as they did not meet the same needs, or were not intended for the same purpose, as the products sold by Sainsbury's that were the subject of the comparison. The High Court dismissed Sainsbury's claim for judicial review, and the case is illustrative of the considerable hurdles a claimant must overcome if it is to succeed in this form of challenge.
机译:广告申请标准局(“ ASA”)的裁决进行司法审查的申请的一个罕见示例,强调了品牌在试图挑战竞争对手的比较广告时有时会遇到的困难。在R(塞恩斯伯里超市有限公司)诉独立审查员案中,塞恩斯伯里(Sainsbury's)试图挑战ASA关于乐购(Tesco)著名的“价格承诺”广告活动的一项发现。特别是,塞恩斯伯里(Sainsbury's)声称,乐购(Tesco)提供的某些产品不符合英国实施《比较广告指令》第4(b)条的规定,因为它们不能满足与销售比较的主题是塞恩斯伯里的。高等法院驳回了塞恩斯伯里的司法复审请求,该案说明了索赔人要想成功应对这种挑战,必须克服相当大的障碍。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号