header-logo header-logo

Misleading scratch cards unlawful

24 October 2012
Issue: 7535 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Prize-draw promoters have hands slapped by ECJ

Prize-draw promotions that mislead consumers into thinking they have won a valuable prize or encourage them to call premium-rate numbers may be unlawful, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled.

Last February, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) successfully sought a High Court injunction preventing several companies and individuals from promoting prize-draw scratch cards which it considered misleading, through magazines and newspapers or by direct mail. This was the first case to reach the courts under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (SI 2008/1277).

The regulations prohibit businesses from describing a product as “free” when it’s not or creating a false impression that the consumer will win a prize.

The OFT objected to several promotions involving individually addressed letters, scratch cards and advertising inserts placed into newspapers and magazines. All but one encouraged the consumer to call a premium rate number, and 99% of all winners won a prize worth just a few pounds.

The Court of Appeal asked the ECJ for guidance. The ECJ noted the psychological effect on consumers of being told they had won a prize, agreed with the OFT’s position, and set out guidance for trader behaviour.

Peter Stevens, partner at TWM Solicitors, says: “It will be interesting to see how such prize promotions change in the future. 

“Promoters will either have to be much more up front about the value of the prizes which are likely to be won and the costs involved in collecting them, or the promoters will have to absorb all such costs and, presumably, reduce the value of the prizes accordingly.”

Issue: 7535 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll