https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196756 Comparative advertising may praise a trader's own goods and compare them with a rival's goods, but it cannot state or imply that the competitor's product is bad or publish material whose dominant purpose is to injure the competitor's reputation. Applying that standard, the court held that the withdrawn point of sale posters could not continue in circulation, and the electronic advertisement with the red blob on the bottle of "Brand X" was also restrained. After the defendant's modifications, the remaining visual was not, at this stage, likely to be identified by consumers with the plaintiff's product. Whether the defendant's product was actually superior was left for trial. en-us Wed, 01 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:14:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196756 Comparative advertising may praise a trader's own goods and compare them with a rival's goods, but it cannot state or imply that the competitor's product is bad or publish material whose dominant purpose is to injure the competitor's reputation. Applying that standard, the court held that the withdrawn point of sale posters could not continue in circulation, and the electronic advertisement with the red blob on the bottle of "Brand X" was also restrained. After the defendant's modifications, the remaining visual was not, at this stage, likely to be identified by consumers with the plaintiff's product. Whether the defendant's product was actually superior was left for trial. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 01 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196756