Author: Dennis Chapman
Published: July 6, 2009
Reading time: 1 minute
This article is 15 years old.
Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down
This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.
The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.
The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.
Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.
If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.
All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.
Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.
In a recent case involving perfumes (L’Oreal SA and others v Bellive NV and others Case C-487/07) it was held that where a supplier used comparison lists to be supplied to retailers which gave the name of the genuine perfume that the cheaper product was imitating then this was unlawful comparative advertising.
It might seem this case has no bearing on the motor trade but be aware that if you are saying things like “this headlight is as good as replacement as the Mercedes/Jaguar/Audi genuine one” then you could fall foul of this law.
