Rulings (31)
  • Geraint Christopher t/a Hemp in Avalon

    • Upheld
    • 02 December 2020

    A newspaper and Instagram post by a hemp shop were banned for inciting people to break the law by discouraging them from wearing face coverings in shops.

  • KS Competitions Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 02 December 2020

    A website ad promoting a competition to win hair products breached the CAP Code for not explaining the free entry route and for stating that its closing date would be extended if all tickets were not sold.

  • ContextLogic Inc t/a Wish.com

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 18 November 2020

    A paid-for ad on Facebook was irresponsible for portraying a model who was under 18 years of age in a sexual manner.

  • Person(s) unknown t/a TBM Enterprises and Thebettingman

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 18 November 2020

    An Instagram story by Sam Gowland was not obviously identifiable as an ad and broke the rules on social responsibility for suggesting using betting tipsters was a way of achieving financial security.

  • Rightmove Group Ltd t/a Rightmove

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 18 November 2020

    A TV ad did not depict gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm.

  • LC International Ltd t/a Gala Spins

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 28 October 2020

    A paid-for Facebook post by a gambling company was banned for being of particular appeal to children.

  • Missguided Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Poster
    • 21 October 2020

    Two posters sold by Missguidied were not found to be offensive or irresponsible.

  • Profit Accumulator Ltd t/a Bonus Accumulator

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 14 October 2020

    A paid-for Facebook post and a website post for a betting company were banned for presenting gambling as a way to achieve financial security, for being misleading and for being socially irresponsible.

  • Betfair Casino Ltd t/a Betfair Casino

    • Not upheld
    • 07 October 2020

    A TV ad for Betfair did not portray, condone or encourage gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible.

  • ElectraWorks Ltd t/a BWIN party, Party Poker

    • Upheld
    • 07 October 2020

    A paid-for Google search ad for a betting website irresponsibly suggested consumers could achieve financial security by gambling.

  • Omaze Inc

    • Upheld
    • 07 October 2020

    A website promotion for a house raffle competition did not clearly explain the free route entry.

  • Global Brands Ltd

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

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

  • ContextLogic Inc t/a Wish.com

    • Upheld
    • App (paid ad), Game (mobile/app)
    • 29 July 2020

    Four in-app ads for the e-commerce platform Wish were banned for placing explicit sexual images in apps that were likely to be used by children.

  • Paul Coleman

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 17 June 2020

    A website promoting gambling systems made misleading claims about the success and profitability of the system and was socially irresponsible for suggesting gambling could provide an alternative to employment or was a way to achieve financial security.

  • LC International Limited t/a Coral

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 03 June 2020

    A tweet on a gambling company’s Twitter feed broke the rules by presenting a promotion in a way that was likely to encourage potentially harmful gambling behaviour.

  • LC International Ltd t/a Ladbrokes

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 03 June 2020

    A TV ad for a gambling company did not break the rules on encouraging gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible or portray gambling as indispensable.

  • Mizkan Euro Ltd t/a Branston

    • Not upheld
    • Poster
    • 13 May 2020

    A poster ad for vinegar did not condone or encourage poor nutritional habits or an unhealthy lifestyle in children.

  • Hydro Solutions Fylde Ltd t/a Elite Competitions

    • Upheld
    • Internet (sales promotion)
    • 06 May 2020

    A website page for prize competitions was misleading because the free entry route was unclear, the closing date was extended without good reason and a prize of 70% of ticket sales was not a reasonable equivalent to the advertised prizes.

  • Hey Habito Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television, Video on demand
    • 22 April 2020

    A TV and VOD ad for an online mortgage broker featuring cartoon gory horror was scheduled appropriately to prevent it from likely being seen by young children.

  • ITV Broadcasting Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 22 April 2020

    A TV ad for a film was not scheduled inappropriately as children made up only a small proportion of the audience and it was not directed at or likely to be of particular appeal to them.