Rulings (57)
  • 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.

  • Warner Bros Entertainment UK Ltd

    • Upheld in part
    • Poster, Television
    • 05 August 2026

    Posters for the film Lee Cronin’s The Mummy were likely to cause fear or distress to young children and were unsuitable for outdoor display. Two other ads were investigated but they didn’t break our rules.

  • Warner Bros Entertainment UK Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Poster, Television
    • 05 August 2026

    A TV ad and two posters for the film They Will Kill You weren’t irresponsible or offensive and didn’t glamourise violence and knife crime. The ads were suitable for display in an untargeted medium, had suitable scheduling restrictions and hasn’t been inappropriately placed during a UEFA Champions Leag...

  • 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.

  • Betway Ltd t/a Betway

    • Not Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 27 May 2026

    An Instagram post for Betway featuring Thierry Henry wasn’t likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s. 

  • Cyan Blue Odds Ltd t/a Oddschecker

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 27 May 2026

    Two Instagram posts for an online betting platform featuring Harry Kane and Erling Haaland were likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.