Rulings (62)
  • Ferrero UK Ltd t/a Thorntons

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 19 August 2026

    A paid-for Instagram ad for Thorntons didn’t break the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product.

  • The Boots Company PLC t/a Boots

    • Upheld
    • National newspaper (paid ad)
    • 19 August 2026

    A national press ad for Boots featured a promotion that wasn’t administered fairly and caused participants unnecessary disappointment.

  • YO! Sushi UK Ltd t/a YO!

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 12 August 2026

    A paid-for Instagram post for YO! Sushi broke the rules by featuring an identifiable specific less healthy food product.

  • Costcutter Supermarkets Group Ltd t/a Costcutter and Mondelez Europe Services GmbH – UK branch t/a Cadbury (Mondelez)

    • Upheld in part
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 05 August 2026

    A webpage for Costcutter and Cadburys broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product. Another ad was investigated but it didn’t break our rules.

  • Innate-Essence Ltd t/a the Turmeric Co.

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 05 August 2026

    A website for a turmeric shot company made claims that a food could prevent, treat or cure human disease.

  • Bubbleology UK-I Ltd t/a Bubbleology

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 22 July 2026

     A paid-for Instagram ad for a bubble tea company didn’t break the less healthy food rules because it was a small and medium-sized enterprise and was therefore exempt. 

  • Domino's Pizza UK & Ireland Ltd t/a Domino's

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Television, Video on demand
    • 22 July 2026

    A TV ad, Video on Demand ad and a YouTube ad for Domino’s broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product. 

  • Higham Miller Coffee Ltd t/a Exhale Healthy Coffee

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 22 July 2026

    A paid-for Instagram ad for a coffee company made unauthorised health and nutrition claims and included health claims that referred to the recommendation of an individual health professional.   

  • McDonald's Restaurants Ltd t/a McDonald's

    • Not Upheld
    • Television
    • 22 July 2026

    A TV ad for McDonalds didn’t break the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy product.   

  • Domino's Pizza UK & Ireland Ltd t/a Domino's

    • Not Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 08 July 2026

    Two paid-for social media ads for Domino’s pizza didn’t break the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy product.

  • Kentucky Fried Chicken (Great Britain) Ltd t/a KFC

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Television, Video on demand
    • 08 July 2026

    A TV ad, Video on Demand and three paid-for social media ads for KFC didn’t break the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy product.

  • Mars Wrigley Confectionery UK Ltd t/a Mars

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 08 July 2026

    A paid-for Instagram ad for M&M’s broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product through the inclusion of a character that depicted a specific less healthy food product.

  • Papa John's (GB) Ltd t/a Papa Johns

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 08 July 2026

    A paid for Facebook ad for Papa John’s didn’t break the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy product.

  • S&E1 Ltd t/a Morley's Woking

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 08 July 2026

    A paid-for Instagram ad for Morley’s broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product.

  • Uber Eats UK Ltd t/a Uber Eats

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 08 July 2026

    A Video on Demand pause ad for Uber Eats didn’t break the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy product.

  • Patisserie Valerie Production Ltd t/a Patisserie Valerie

    • Not upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 24 June 2026

    Three paid-for Google search ads for Patisserie Valerie didn’t break the less healthy food rules as they were a small or medium sized enterprise and therefore were exempt from the restrictions. 

  • The Clean Supps LLC t/a Inno Supps

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 24 June 2026

    Four paid-for Meta ads promoting supplements made claims that a food supplement could prevent, treat or cure human diseases or conditions, made unauthorised health claims and made claims that referred to a rate or amount of weight loss for food supplements. The ad also used ...

  • Amazon Europe Core Sarl t/a Amazon.co.uk

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 10 June 2026

    A paid-for Instagram ad for Amazon Fresh UK broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product.

  • DBZ Marketplace Online Ltd t/a Debenhams

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 20 May 2026

    Two video display banners for Debenhams made misleading savings claims.

  • John Lewis plc

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 20 May 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad and an online display ad for John Lewis made misleading savings claims.