Rechtsleer

Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 2, (a) Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 2, (c) Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 4, (d)

“Denigrerende vergelijkende reclame [een casus in verband met energie-etikettering]” (noot onder Antwerpen 20 januari 2021)”.

 

In her contribution, the author discusses the judgement of 20 January 2022 of the Court of Appeal in Antwerp that ruled that an email sent to a journalist by vacuum producer Dyson accusing its competitor BSH Home Appliances (brand names Siemens and Bosch) of cheating and tampering with labels on vacuum cleaners, constituted advertising. The journalist simply took the email (almost word for word) and distributed the information through several other media channels. The Court subsequently confirmed the decision of the Commercial Court and condemned Dyson for unlawful comparative advertising due to discrediting and denigrating its competitor BSH Home Appliances. The author approves the judgement and clarifies that emails and letters can constitute advertisements as they may indirectly influence the public, even when these are sent to a journalist.