Rulings (17)
  • We Are TALA Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 22 May 2024

    Two Instagram reels and four TikToks on influencer Grace Beverly's accounts were not obviously identifiable as ads.  

  • Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 15 May 2024

    A series of tweets misleadingly implied that a promotion included all product lines, failed to include the closing dates or times of the promotion and misleadingly implied that further discounts would not be available when the promotion ended.

  • The Sky Mining Company Ltd t/a Sky Mining

    • Press general, Internet (website content), Social media (own site)
    • 10 April 2024

    A press ad, Instagram ad and website did not make it clear that the company’s diamonds were synthetic, which was misleading.

  • MNG-Mango UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • App (own claim)
    • 20 March 2024

    A product listing for a sweater featured a model who appeared to be unhealthily thin.

  • Calvin Klein Inc

    • Upheld in part
    • Poster
    • 06 March 2024

    [Republished ruling] Three posters for Calvin Klein did not objectify women, but one was inappropriate for display in an untargeted medium.

  • OneCompress

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 06 March 2024

    Two paid-for Facebook ads for bamboo gloves and socks made medical claims for unlicensed products.

  • Grandbing Technology Co Ltd t/a On Fancy

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 24 January 2024

    A website for an online clothing retailer portrayed a child in a sexual way and was irresponsible.

  • Charles Tyrwhitt Shirts Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 20 December 2023

    A paid-for Facebook ad for Charles Tyrwhitt, a clothing retailer, seen on 28 July 2023, featured an image of a print cotton shirt. Text on the post stated “[…] We’re proud to be a Carbon Neutral business”.

  • CrypticKits

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 22 November 2023

    A TikTok post and Instagram post misleadingly implied that people could buy football shirts for £1

  • Whaleco UK Ltd t/a Temu

    • Upheld
    • Internet (display), App (paid ad)
    • 01 November 2023

    Four display ads and an in-app ad for Temu were sexually graphic and likely to cause widespread offence; sexualised someone who was a child; sexually objectified women; and were inappropriately targeted.

  • Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 27 September 2023

    An email ad failed to administer a pricing promotion via a discount code fairly.

  • Celine SA

    • Upheld
    • National press
    • 20 September 2023

    An ad in a magazine featured a model who appeared unhealthy thin and was irresponsible.

  • Maje SAS t/a Maje SAS

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 20 September 2023

    A paid-for Instagram post featured a model who appeared unhealthy thin and was irresponsible.

  • JD Sports Fashion plc

    • Upheld
    • Poster
    • 30 August 2023

    A poster for JD Sports and Adidas irresponsibly portrayed unsafe driving practices.

  • Sisters & Seekers Ltd t/a Sisters & Seekers

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 16 August 2023

    A website for a clothing brand irresponsibly glamorised smoking and featured people who appeared to be under 25 years of age.

  • Gemporia Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Television
    • 05 July 2023

    Two teleshopping presentations for a jewellery retailer made misleading saving claims and price statements.

  • Warehouse Fashions Online Ltd t/a Warehouse

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 21 June 2023

    A product listing on a fashion retailer’s website irresponsibly featured a model who appeared unhealthily thin.