Read Time: 03 minutes
The bench of Justice Amit Bansal directed Dabur to substantiate their claims that the fluoride in toothpaste leads to lower IQ in children, brittle bones, and spotting on teeth. The bench remarked, “Along with the reply, the defendant shall place on record material to justify the following claims made by the defendant in the said advertisement on account of the presence of fluoride in a toothpaste”.
The Delhi High Court, recently, in a petition filed by Colgate seeking a take-down order against an advertisement issued by Dabur. The advertisement allegedly contained disparaging remarks regarding the presence of fluoride in toothpaste and its purported harmful effects on children.
Senior Advocate Amit Sibal, representing Colgate, submitted that, apart from other allegedly derogatory content, the advertisement included a direct reference to Colgate’s product. He specifically pointed to the tagline “DOES YOUR FAVOURITE TOOTHPASTE HAVE FLUORIDE?” and argued that the word “favourite” was an unmistakable reference to the Colgate brand, which had been identified as the market leader.
Senior Advocate Sibal further informed the court that the impugned advertisement had been published in the same newspaper and on the same date on which Colgate had issued a front-page advertisement promoting their fluoride-based toothpaste.
Following these submissions, the court issued a notice on the application. Advocate Hemant Singh, appearing on behalf of Dabur, accepted the notice and informed the court that Dabur—without prejudice to its rights and contentions—would forthwith remove the word “favourite” from the advertisement’s tagline.
The court directed Dabur to file a reply within two weeks. Additionally, Dabur was instructed to place on record materials justifying the following claims made in the advertisement regarding the effects of fluoride in toothpaste: 1. Lower IQ in children 2. Brittle bones 3. Spotting on teeth
For Plaintiff: Senior Advocate Amit Sibal with Advocates Saif Khan, Achuttan Sreekumar, Rohit Bansal and Swastik BisaryaFor Defendant: Advocates Hemant Singh, Mamta Rani Jha, Jawahar Lal, Manish Kumar Mishra, Akansha Singh and Harshit RajCase Title: Colgate Palmolive Company v Dabur India (CS(COMM) 567/2019)
Please Login or Register
