Posts Tagged ‘ASA’
Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has banned a series of internet and poster ads for Lynx shower gel and deodorant featuring Lucy Pinder.
The ASA censored Unilever’s ads for being sexually provocative and possibly demeaning to women. The ASA also ruled that the appearance of the ads on sites such as Yahoo, Spotify and Anorak was irresponsible as they could be seen by children.
The ruling is yet another sign that the ASA intends to get tough with advertisers when it comes to protecting children from sexualised imagery and has made it very clear that what may be seen as acceptable in a magazine may not be appropriate on a billboard. Much of this concern is driven by parents who are increasingly worried about the images available to their children on the internet and social networking sites.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 9.0/10 (1 vote cast)
Tags: advertising standards authority, ASA, lucy pinder, Lynx advertisement banned, marketing campaigns, sexualised imagery, social networking sites, Unilever
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands, Retail | No Comments »
Wednesday, September 21st, 2011
The advertising watchdog has today (21 September 2011) ruled that a Heineken ad showing a smartly dressed man wandering through a party, performing various tricks and being admired by women, did not breach advertising rules on social responsibility and alcohol.
Complainants challenged the ad on the basis that it implied alcohol could enhance personal qualities and talents, contribute to popularity, confidence and social and sexual success and make a social occasion successful. However, the ASA said that the Heineken advert was not in breach because the man’s skills and popularity are not linked with him drinking alcohol.
In this case, the ASA has clearly concluded that the fact the man was drinking Heineken was incidental to his popularity and skills and not due to the fact that he was drinking alcohol. This ruling shows how fine the line can be between a breach and what the ASA deems acceptable. I anticipate that Heineken’s marketing team has a good grasp of the advertising rules as the bottle of Heineken is out of shot for the majority of the ad, and it is this that subtly disconnects the skilful, popular man from the alcoholic beverage. Well done Heineken!
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, advertising watchdog, ASA, Heineken, Heineken ad, social resopnsibility and alcohol
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Wednesday, September 14th, 2011
Today, Tesco has been told that its advert for its own brand Butcher’s Choice Sausages must no longer be broadcast in its current form. The ad showed pigs roaming in a field and walking freely in a barn. Complaint was made that this was misleading because it implied that the pigs were reared in an unrestricted environment with access to an outdoor pasture. In fact, the pigs used for the sausages are bred both indoors and outdoors, with movement restricted.
This ad actually only showed the pigs roaming outdoors for 4 seconds, before switching to them in a shed with an open door. In addition, Tesco did not make any claims in relation to how the pigs were reared, for example, ‘free range’. However, the ASA, in upholding the complaint, makes it clear that visuals alone can be misleading. Tesco clearly recognises the increasing demand by consumers for meat that is produced with high animal welfare. However, it is important to remember that actions can speak louder than words, so companies must not forget to ensure that their visual claims are capable of substantiation as well as their written ones.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertisement, animal welfare, ASA, Butcher's Choice Sausages, Tesco
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | 1 Comment »
Wednesday, September 7th, 2011
Phones 4 U thought that Thursday 21 April was just the same as every other Thursday. However, it was Holy Thursday. On this day, Phones 4 U placed an ad in the Metro newspaper which depicted a cartoon of Jesus, grinning, winking, and giving the thumbs up under the text ‘Miraculous deals on Samsung Galaxy Android phones’.
The Christian community were not impressed, and 98 people complained that the ad was disrespectful to Christians, especially as it was run during the Easter period. The ASA today (7 Sep 2011) found that the ad breached rule 4.1 of the CAP Code as it caused harm and offence.
The ASA accepts that marketing communications may be distasteful without necessarily breaching the Code. However, they urge marketeers to consider public sensitivities before using potentially offensive material. Companies should not be deterred from being edgy and tongue in cheek with their marketing efforts, but they must make sure they take all external factors, including timing, into consideration before launching a new campaign. Otherwise, the risk of vexing a large proportion of your target audience is extremely high.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, ASA, Christian community, Jesus, marketing communications, Metro, Phones 4 U, Samsung Galaxy Android
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Wednesday, August 17th, 2011
Earlier this year (2011) the ASA ruled that an Optical Express TV advert and brochure which implied that the two times Open winner, Padraig Harrington, had benefited from surgery with them had been ‘misleading’.
The company stood by its advert and challenged the ASA’s decision, claiming that Mr Harrington was a patient and had received laser eye surgery at their clinic. They were particularly riled that the complaint had been raised by another laser eye surgery provider, and not by a consumer. They said that they would take “every possible legal action available to [them] to challenge the decision and have it reversed.”
The ASA re-deliberated and in a crushing blow to Optical Express, today confirmed its initial verdict: The ad was misleading.
Optical Express took a risk when it decided to challenge the ASA’s decision and is likely to suffer further negative publicity as the ASA’s decision is bound to feature in the press and those who missed it the first time are given a second chance to see that the ASA don’t quite believe what they see!
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 4.5/10 (2 votes cast)
Tags: advertising standards authority, ASA, laser eye surgery, misleading adverts, Optical Express, Padraig Harrington
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Wednesday, July 27th, 2011
The cosmetic giant L’Oreal has been ordered by the Advertising Standards Authority to stop using pictures of Julia Roberts and model Christy Turlington upholding a complaint that the images were overly airbrushed.
The complaint came from Lib Dem MP Jo Swinson, a long standing campaigner against unrealistic images of women in advertising. Swinson is claiming the decision as a victory stating that “this ban sends a powerful message to advertisers – let’s get back to reality”, and rightly so. It is perfectly legitimate for advertisers to show their products in the best possible light, however they should not cross the line of becoming misleading.
The ASA has shown its hand in this case and arguably cast doubt on the products in question. Advertisers need to be careful to show the true effects of their products or risk consumers questioning whether they are as good as they first appear.
Dmitrije Sirovica
0115 976 6243
dsirovica@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 7.0/10 (3 votes cast)
Tags: advertisers, advertising, advertising standards authority, airbrushed images, ASA, Christy Turlington, Jo Swinson, Julia Roberts, L'Oreal
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Thursday, April 28th, 2011
We have reported that the ASA, with effect from March 2011, would be extending its remit to regulate marketing communications made online. This now includes statements made on marketer’s own websites.
The first such adjudication was published yesterday. The ASA has held that a claim made on the Maperton Trust’s website – that its product repelled head lice – should not be made, since the Maperton Trust did not produce the necessary evidence to support that claim.
We have already had queries from businesses concerned about this extension. Our view is that this first decision reinforces the fundamental principle that a marketer should always be able to objectively substantiate every claim before it is made. What this decision does not address are any of the particular issues arising from online marketing, such as user-generated content, and the enforcement of codes on the use of social media. However we are confident that decisions touching on these issues will not be too far away - and we will keep you posted.
Posted by Oliver Sweeney, who specialises in regulatory matters; including compliance, representation e.g. company prosecutions and public inquiries; transport issues; commercial litigation, including reputation management, contractual litigation and injunctions.
Oliver Sweeney
0115 976 6247
osweeney@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)
Tags: advertising standards authority, ASA, maperton trust, marketing communications, online marcoms ruling, online marketing, online marketing regulation
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands, Regulatory | No Comments »
Friday, March 11th, 2011
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has banned a Walkers crisps promotion which offered entrants a chance to win £10 if they could correctly predict where and when in the country it would rain.
The promotion initially allowed entrants to enter up to twice a day, however one person complained when they had purchased enough packets of crisps to enter twice a day but were later informed that entries had been reduced to just one per day.
Though Walkers had contacted all customers who had registered an account in the launch phase by email about the change in terms and conditions, the ASA said the promotion had not been administered fairly. Over 40,000 people had entered before the T&C’s were changed who would expect to be able to purchase and bank promotional codes in accordance with the original T&C’s.
Advertisers should take note that the ASA will not be sympathetic to changes in T&C’s once promotions have been launched. Advertisers need to take advice to make sure promotions are fully compliant with the Advertising Codes before running them.
Posted by Oliver Sweeney, who specialises in regulatory matters; including compliance, representation e.g. company prosecutions and public inquiries; transport issues; commercial litigation, including reputation management, contractual litigation and injunctions.
Oliver Sweeney
0115 976 6247
osweeney@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)
Tags: advertising codes, advertising standards authority, ASA, Wallkers crisps
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands, Regulatory | No Comments »
Wednesday, February 9th, 2011
The Government proposes to expand the scope of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to include several new bodies, including the ASA.
Currently, the ASA is not obliged to answer FOI requests for information that a brand uses to attempt to substantiate its claims. However, if the Government do include the ASA in the Act, this could mean it would have to provide the details presented by brands for use in adjudications to anyone making an FOI request.
The ASA are fundamentally against this proposal as it fears it will lose the goodwill that it shares with brands; who incidentally provide it with its funding – essentially it does not want to bite the hand that feeds it.
From a brands point of view, this proposal could be incredibly detrimental and lead to commercially sensitive information being made public. For example, if a complaint is made about a health claim made by a food brand, that company would have to provide evidence that the claim can be justified. This could lead to “secret” ingredients and research information becoming public knowledge and leave the brand without its je ne sais quoi.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: ASA, Brands, freedom of information act
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands, Regulatory | No Comments »
Thursday, February 3rd, 2011
The High Court has ruled that those behind 5 UK prize draws are in breach of the consumer protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 on the grounds that they:
- created the impression that a prize had been won when in fact only a chance to purchase a low value item was offered
- described a holiday voucher as a prize when in fact it would cost a significant sum to go on the holiday, and
- downplayed the costs of premium rate calls to claim a prize.
This Judgment shows that the OFT are willing to bare its teeth when it comes to making sure that consumers are not misled. Whilst criminal enforcement will only be used in the more serious cases of breach, the Government’s proposal for the OFT to have a range of civil sanctions at its disposal is likely to lead to less serious breaches being tackled by the more stringent enforcement action of the OFT rather than the perceived tickle of the ASA in the near future.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: ASA, Consumer protection, OFT, Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands, Regulatory | No Comments »
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011
In the supermarket price war, Asda’s price guarantee is a major weapon. Asda, using a moneysupermarket.com comparison, offer to refund the difference if your shopping would have been cheaper elsewhere. But on Wednesday, the ASA ruled that some of the adverts for this promotion were misleading.
Interestingly, in upholding certain complaints, the ASA did not follow the advice which Asda had received from Clearcast.
We anticipate that this ruling will result in a lot of negative press for Asda. However, reading between the lines, the ASA only upheld four of the nine complaints made. They did not rule that the scheme could not continue to be advertised, or that Asda were more expensive than Tesco’s – they only ruled that the presentation of certain adverts must be changed, because they falsely implied Asda were generally cheaper or that the promotion covered items such as books.
This highlights the importance of taking advice, and being sure that your complaint can procure the desired outcome, before making it.
Posted by Oliver Sweeney, who specialises in regulatory matters; including compliance, representation e.g. company prosecutions and public inquiries; transport issues; commercial litigation, including reputation management, contractual litigation and injunctions.
Oliver Sweeney
0115 976 6247
osweeney@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 9.0/10 (1 vote cast)
Tags: ASA, Asda, misleading adverts, supermarket price war, Tesco
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands, Regulatory | No Comments »
Friday, December 17th, 2010
The ASA has recently reminded us that Santa Claus most definitely does not exist.
Or rather, as those keen eyed readers will notice from the title, that a Santa clause does not exist, as part of the Advertising Codes. The ASA has reported that every year at the time of glad tidings, mince pies, carols, and general merriment it receives a sack full of complaints from angry parents. For example, last year it received 40 complaints against an Asda TV advert depicting parents buying and hiding presents. Why would they do this when Santa will be bringing them on Christmas Eve …… the children might ask?
The ASA did not investigate. Nevertheless, it accepts that the Codes place a particular emphasis on protecting children from harm and distress.
Accordingly this year, to save us from tears, the ASA had reminded advertisers to ‘tread carefully’ when putting their Christmas adverts together.
Posted by Fiona Carter, who specialises in commercial regulation, compliance advice and investigations; is head of Browne Jacobson’s advertising and marketing team and food and drink group.
Fiona Carter
0115 976 6224
fcarter@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 9.0/10 (1 vote cast)
Tags: advertising, advertising codes, ASA, marketing
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Thursday, December 9th, 2010
An ad campaign by Carling has been given the ASA’s seal of approval.
Heineken UK challenged whether the claims “NEW TASTE LOCK CAN” and “Scientifically proven to lock in great taste” were misleading as they could not be substantiated. However, Molson Coors Brewing Company (UK) Ltd (MCBC) answered the challenge by providing evidence regarding the technology that made the cans new and details of extensive tests conducted that showed the maximum iron content found in the new cans compared to the old cans had reduced, and was at or below the level at which trained in-house taste testers could identify a metallic taste.
MCBC understand the importance of ensuring that before any claims are made it is imperative that statistically significant evidence is gathered, just in case you are presented with a challenge. Much to Heineken’s dismay, MCBC will now get better press from this ad campaign than they would have done had the challenge not been made in the first place !
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 9.0/10 (2 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, ASA, Brands, marketing
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Tuesday, November 16th, 2010
Yesterday, Unilever proudly unveiled its new “Sustainable Living Plan”. Through “small actions”, the plan “aims to help everyone enjoy a good quality of life while respecting the planet”.
Consumers are increasingly looking for ways to ensure that they do not add to negative environmental impacts. Unilever clearly recognise that having an environmental plan will help the company increase its sales. Its claims that it will halve the environmental impact of its products over the next 10 years are bold. In order to meet its targets, Unilever say that some of its products will be reformulated, while others will go through complete packaging overhauls.
Our favourite regulator of advertising, the ASA, is alert to the power of the green badge of honour. It will be interesting to see whether Unilever are asked to substantiate its claims or whether the promises alone are enough to bring about the benefits of a good company greenwash.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, advertising standards, ASA, Brands, environmental, sustainable, Unilever
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Thursday, November 11th, 2010
The ASA has banned a cinema commercial for Nivea Anti Wrinkle cream showing a woman moisturising her face as a voice proclaims “…it’s no surprise that 37% of women feel more attractive now than they did ten years ago”.
The ASA agreed with a viewer’s complaint that the ad does not make it clear whether the 37% was referring to women in general or just those who had used the cream.
In support of the claim, Nivea had carried out a survey on over 12,000 subscribers to its e-mail newsletter. The problem was that the survey sample was too general, as the ASA could not be certain that they were all users of the Nivea product. In addition, the questions asked were not specific to the eventual claim made in the ad but were instead general attitudes questions.
Companies should take heed; it is much easier to withstand challenge if you have a smaller sample of good quality, directly applicable evidence to substantiate your claim.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, ASA, marketing, Nivea
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Wednesday, November 3rd, 2010
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) this week ruled that an ad for Harpic Power Plus misleadingly implied that it was more effective than bleach at killing germs.
The TV ad showed a woman scrubbing a toilet with bleach and then showed limescale under the toilet seat rim and a close up of germs on it.
The voiceover makes various claims, including that “Harpic Power Plus…is five times better than bleach at powering through limescale…”
Unilever were the complainant. It will come as no surprise that one of Unilever’s brands is Domestos: a domestic bleach product. Unilever has become a pro in using the ASA as an effective tool to challenge comparative advertisements. They clearly recognise that a well drafted complaint to the ASA, which highlights breaches of relevant legislation and codes of conduct, can be a more effective (and less costly) tool than engaging in potentially lengthy litigation.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 9.7/10 (3 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, ASA, Harpic, marketing, Unilever
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Wednesday, October 27th, 2010
Only last month did we tweet that Antonio Federici had been chastised by the ASA for making a mockery of the Catholic religion.
Federici were told not to run their advert, which depicted a heavily pregnant woman, dressed as a nun, holding a tub of ice cream ad, again. In response, Federici said that they would be unveiling a new advert, which would continue the theme, to coincide with the Pope’s visit to the UK.
Well, they did, and guess what; it has fallen foul of the advertising code of conduct yet again. This advert shows two men dressed as priests about to kiss, with the text ‘we believe in salivation’.
Call me suspicious, but something tells me that Federici did not fall foul of the code accidentally. It looks like the ASA and its adverse rulings are being exploited by the ice-cream maker’s marketing team to support the brand’s slightly risqué image.
Posted by Nina Best, who specialises in regulatory matters; entertainment licensing; advertising and marketing law; advice and representation on infringement of Food Safety Manufacturing Product Regulations.
Nina Best
0115 976 6529
nbest@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, Antonio Federici, ASA, Brands, marketing
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | No Comments »
Friday, October 15th, 2010
The ASA has upheld yet another complaint against Ryanair’s pricing claims. Easyjet complained that Ryanair could not substantiate the claim ‘Cheapest way to the Sun‘, and did not make the basis of the implied comparison clear. The ad encouraged consumers to ‘Book now for Summer 2010′.
The ASA upheld both complaints. Ryanair’s evidence showed they sometimes offered cheaper flights than their nearest competitor, but did not show that they were cheaper for the whole of Summer 2010. Ryanair have been told not to repeat the ad in its current form.
On the one hand, this is an example of why certain advertisers feel able to ignore the threat of an adverse ASA ruling – because by the time this adjudication was made, ‘Summer 2010′ was long gone. On the other hand, will the reporting of rulings such as this, combined with protests such as ‘ihateryanair.org,’ undermine the credibility of Ryanair’s low-cost business model for Summer 2011?
Posted by Oliver Sweeney, who specialises in regulatory matters; including compliance, representation e.g. company prosecutions and public inquiries; transport issues; commercial litigation, including reputation management, contractual litigation and injunctions.
Oliver Sweeney
0115 976 6247
osweeney@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, ASA, Brands, marketing, Ryanair
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | 1 Comment »
Friday, October 8th, 2010
Last month we reported that the ASA plans to significantly extend its online remit. Our opinion was that this would bring much new material into their territory, and that your competitors may start complaining to the ASA if they feel there is potentially misleading information on your website.
This issue has clearly now been picked up by the ASA and CIPR. The ASA have clarified that “online public relations”, defined as “press releases, other public relations material and editorial content”, are not covered. The ASA will be concerned only with marketing communications, including advertising, sales promotion and direct marketing.
In our view, the boundaries of the above definition are currently insufficiently clear to prevent an influx of complaints once the new system gets underway. However CIPR will be giving further guidance, including examples of common types of activities considered as “public relations”– whether this will resolve the issue remains to be seen.
Posted by Oliver Sweeney, who specialises in regulatory matters; including compliance, representation e.g. company prosecutions and public inquiries; transport issues; commercial litigation, including reputation management, contractual litigation and injunctions.
Oliver Sweeney
0115 976 6247
osweeney@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, ASA, cipr, online advertising
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands, Manufacturing | No Comments »
Wednesday, September 15th, 2010
On Wednesday the ASA ruled that an advert for Antonio Federici ice cream was offensive to Catholics. The advert depicted a heavily pregnant woman, dressed as a nun, holding a tub of ice cream. The advert’s text said “Immaculately Conceived….”
Federici said that their advert was a form of art and self-expression. They felt that advertising should be challenging and often iconoclastic. However the ASA said that the use of the image was likely to be seen as a distortion and mockery of the beliefs of Roman Catholics, and using it in a light hearted way to advertise ice cream was likely to cause serious offence.
In response, Federici have stated that they will be unveiling a new advert, which continues this theme, to coincide with the Pope’s visit to the UK.
This approach is similar to ambush marketing, and at the very least, contradicts the spirit of the ASA’s ruling. Is this another example of an adverse ASA ruling providing useful publicity for a brand?
Posted by Oliver Sweeney, who specialises in regulatory matters; including compliance, representation e.g. company prosecutions and public inquiries; transport issues; commercial litigation, including reputation management, contractual litigation and injunctions.
Oliver Sweeney
0115 976 6247
osweeney@brownejacobson.com
VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
Tags: advertising, ASA, Brands, marketing
Posted in Advertising & Marketing, Brands | 1 Comment »
