
Advertising Law
Labelling advertising: what the law requires
The commercial purpose of a communication must be recognisable. That single principle explains almost every labelling rule in advertising.
Advertising Law
Naming a competitor is permitted and tightly conditioned. Every condition must be met; failing one makes the whole comparison unlawful.

Comparative advertising, meaning advertising that identifies a competitor or their products, is permitted in European law subject to a list of cumulative conditions.
Cumulative means all of them. Satisfying six of seven makes the advertising unlawful.
The comparison must not be misleading. It must compare goods or services meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose. It must compare objectively one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative features, which may include price. It must not discredit or denigrate the competitor. It must not take unfair advantage of the competitor's reputation or trade mark. It must not present goods as imitations of a protected brand. And it must not create confusion between the advertiser and the competitor.
The most common failure. The products compared must meet the same needs.
Comparing your premium service against a competitor's entry-level product, or your annual price against their monthly, or a bundled offer against an unbundled one, fails the condition even if every number is correct.
The features compared must be verifiable, which means the recipient must be able to check them, or the advertiser must be able to substantiate them on request.
That excludes subjective claims. "Better designed" is not verifiable; "18 per cent lighter, measured to standard X" is.
Price comparison is expressly permitted and requires care.
| Requirement | Detail |
|---|---|
| Current prices | at the time of publication, and kept current |
| Same specification | genuinely equivalent products |
| Same conditions | quantity, delivery, contract term |
| Stated basis | when checked, from where, what included |
| Substantiation retained | evidence of the competitor price |
A price comparison published in March using February's competitor prices is misleading once those prices change, and the obligation to keep it current sits with the advertiser.
Accurate criticism of a competitor's product is permitted; ridicule, insinuation and attacks on the competitor as a business are not.
The line is between comparing the products and attacking the competitor. Humour at a competitor's expense is where advertisers most often cross it.
Using a competitor's trade mark to identify them in a lawful comparison is permitted. Using it in a way that trades on its reputation or suggests a connection is not.
Comparative advertising invites a response. Assume the competitor will examine every element and take advice before publication, not after the letter arrives.
Yes, where the comparison meets all the conditions. Naming is not itself the problem; failing a condition is.
Yes, if the products are genuinely comparable, the prices are current, and the basis of comparison is stated.
More from Advertising Law

Advertising Law
The commercial purpose of a communication must be recognisable. That single principle explains almost every labelling rule in advertising.

Advertising Law
The rules are settled and routinely breached. The exposure sits with the brand as much as the creator, and the contract is where it is managed.

Advertising Law
A claim does not have to be false to be misleading. It only has to create an impression that does not correspond to reality.