Rulings (51)
  • EverAI Ltd t/a AI Realities

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

    A paid-for Facebook ad for an AI companion app was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious and widespread offence by including a harmful gender stereotype which objectified women.

  • 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...

  • 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.

  • BoyleSports (Gibraltar) Ltd t/a BoyleSports

    • Upheld
    • 29 July 2026

    A paid-for online display ad for a gambling company encouraged gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible and could lead to financial harm by encouraging frequent and repetitive participation.  

  • 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. 

  • 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.

  • Paramount Pictures UK

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

    A pre-roll YouTube ad wasn’t likely to cause serious or widespread offence.

  • Singapore New Reading Technology Pte Ltd t/a GoodNovel

    • Upheld
    • App (paid ad)
    • 01 July 2026

    An in-game ad for an online reading platform was socially irresponsible, condoned violence, included harmful gender stereotypes and was likely to cause harm or serious and widespread offence.

  • Videoslots Ltd t/a Mr Vegas

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

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a gambling company featured imagery that was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

  • Big Fang Collective Ltd t/a Golf Fang

    • Upheld
    • Leaflet, brochure, catalogue or directory
    • 24 June 2026

    A leaflet for an indoor golf venue didn’t make clear it was an ad and caused unjustified distress by resembling a parking ticket. 

  • Parc AI Ltd t/a Parc

    • Upheld
    • Leaflet, brochure, catalogue or directory
    • 24 June 2026

    A leaflet for a car parking app didn’t make clear it was an ad and caused unjustified distress by resembling a parking ticket.

  • 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. 

  • Wrappiness UK

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

    A paid-for Facebook ad for an online décor and gift retailer was likely to cause serious and widespread offence including by using explicit language and sexual references.