Giving your ads or products a regal or aristocratic touch may seem like an easy way to pull in the punters.
Many want to raise profile with a mention of Their Majesties, grab a bit of the “Kate effect” (whereby items favoured by Princess Catherine sell out overnight), or suggest endorsement with a sovereign shout-out: but what exactly is and isn’t the done thing when it comes to featuring the Royals?
You won’t find this protocol in Debrett’s or Tatler, but in the CAP Code and Guidelines from the Lord Chamberlain’s Office.
Photo ops and name drops: permission needed
Ordinarily members of the Royal family should not be shown or mentioned in an ad without prior permission (rule 6.2).The Lord Chancellor’s Office should be approached for permission and holds a list of ever-changing current family members.
An incidental reference to the Royals, unconnected to an advertised product may be OK. For example, dropping best wishes on a birthday or other significant milestone or occasion, such as the Centenary of Queen Elizabeth II’s birth on 21 Apr 2026.
Seal of Approval: no false endorsements please
Royal Coats of Arms and Emblems (including Crowns and Coronets) should not be used in ads so as to misleadingly imply authorisation or approval by a member of the Royal Family (rule 3.54).
Meanwhile, approval from the Royal Warrant Holders' Association does allow entities to use Royal arms as a recognition of supply of goods used by the Royal Household; these run for a five-year period.
Exceptions also apply, for example, to commemorative products specifically produced for significant events. In fact, a special emblem was produced for His Majesty The King’s Coronation in 2023 which could be used without the need for individual authorisation.
Dodgy doppelgängers
If you do advertise your commemorative pieces, make sure they are fit for a king. The ASA upheld a complaint against an ad for a Prince William Royal Bridegroom Porcelain Doll. Those ordering their very own mail-order Prince in celebration of his wedding day were disappointed. The image of the doll in the ad did not quite match the item which was delivered, so the ad was found to be misleading (The Bradford Exchange Ltd t/a The Ashton-Drake Galleries, 10 October 2012). Any future versions should be in “good taste” (according to the Lord Chamberlain’s guidance) and realistic: as ever remember, royal or not, misleading claims should be avoided.
On the question of accurate descriptions in ads (if not good taste), in 2023, the ASA ruled that an ad for a coin commemorating the death of Princess Diana gave a misleading impression in terms of gold content and a thickness similar to coins of legal tender. In fact, the coin appeared to be flexible and part of the thickness was due to plastic lamination/casing (HMK V AG t/a Windsor Mint, 18 October 2023).
In the last few years, the social channels have been hit with deepfake endorsements, including some relating to cryptocurrencies. You can read more about this in the ASA’s 2025 Scam Ad Alert update, which includes an example of a scam ad featuring the likeness of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
Artistocrats4U?
What about other ways to reflect Britain’s heritage and enhance your status or bankability. If lacking a royal connection, might one fast-track it to the upper echelons of this green and pleasant land, by adding soupçon of BIRGing (Basking in Reflective Glory), into the marketing mix on acquiring one’s own title? Perhaps not: the ASA’s 2026 ruling concluded that GJF Baron Nobilis Services Co. Ltd t/a Noble Titles should not state one could purchase a legal or officially-recognised title from them, if that was not the case. Their ad purportedly selling the title, “Ambassador of the Knights Templars” and the authority to use “The Honourable” for £20,000, was found to be misleading.
Need more?
You can get free and confidential advice on your non-broadcast ads by contacting the CAP Copy Advice team.
More on
-
Keep up to date
Sign up to our rulings, newsletters and emargoed access for Press. Subscribe now.
