Rulings (14)
  • BrewDog plc

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 07 July 2021

    A paid-for Instagram post by Brewdog was banned for making misleading nutrition claims for an alcoholic drink and for making other non-permitted nutrition claims.

  • DRTY DRINKS Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 07 July 2021

    Two Instagram posts by a drinks company were banned for making misleading nutrition claims for an alcoholic drink and for encouraging excessive drinking.

  • Long Ashton Holdings Ltd t/a High Water

    • Upheld in part
    • Website (own site)
    • 07 July 2021

    A website post by a drinks company was banned for making non-permitted nutrition claims for an alcoholic drink.

  • Wild Drinks Group Ltd t/a Whisp Drinks

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 07 July 2021

    A website post by a drinks company was banned for making misleading nutrition claims for an alcoholic drink and for making other non-permitted nutrition claims.

  • Au Vodka Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 30 June 2021

    Seven Instagram and a website post for a vodka company were banned for encouraging excessive drinking, for linking the consumption of alcohol with driving, and for featuring a rapper who under 25 years of age.

  • UKGBrunch Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 16 June 2021

    Two posts on an event promoter’s Facebook page were banned for encouraging excessive consumption of alcohol.

  • RR Whisky Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking), Internet (website content)
    • 07 April 2021

    A Facebook and website ad for a whisky company were banned for irresponsibly linking the consumption of alcohol with mountaineering, an activity in which drinking would be unsafe.

  • Camden Town Brewery Ltd

    • Upheld in part
    • 10 March 2021

    A TV ad for a brewery was banned for presenting a giveaway of free items in an unclear way that confused it with a prize draw. The same ad was not likely to appeal strongly to children.

  • Beer52 Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Mailing
    • 24 February 2021

    A letter from a beer company broke the CAP Code as it was not obviously identifiable as an ad.

  • Diageo Great Britain Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 17 February 2021

    A TV ad for a whisky company did not imply, condone, or encourage irresponsible drinking or immoderate drinking and did not breach the BCAP Code.

  • Edrington-Beam Suntory UK

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 06 January 2021

    A TV ad for whisky did not link alcohol with sexual activity and did not breach the BCAP Code.

  • BrewDog plc

    • Upheld in part
    • National newspaper (paid ad)
    • 18 November 2020

    Poster and press ads for BrewDog beer broke the rules on offence by using a reference to an expletive in media targeted to a general audience. The same ad appearing in targeted magazines did not break the rules.

  • Beer52 Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 16 September 2020

    A website ad for a beer subscription service made misleading claims about a discount offer.

  • Global Brands Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 02 September 2020

    An Instagram post promoting a VK drink did not inappropriately target children.