Uncertainty of the Legal Regulation of Relations in the Sphere of Comparative Advertising: the Essence of the Problem and Possible Solutions

  • Evgenia E. FROLOVA Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russia
  • Ksenia M. BELIKOVA Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russia
  • Natalia V. BADAEVA Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russia
  • Irina V. ERMAKOVA Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russia

Abstract

The article analyzes the norms on the prohibition of incorrect comparison in advertising, listed in Clause 1, Part 2 of Article 5 (Federal Law of Russian Federation ‘On Advertising’, hereinafter – the Law on Advertising) and Article 14.3 of Federal Law of the Russian Federation ‘On Protection of Competition’ (Federal Law of the Russian Federation ‘On Protection of Competition’, hereinafter – the Law on Protection of Competition), from the point of view of their application by the courts and FAS Russia when considering the relevant case category.


The authors consider the rule on prohibition of incorrect comparison as a central rule regulating legal relations in the sphere of advertising, which contains a comparison of the advertised goods with competitors’ goods (comparative advertising). The problem is that none of the laws indicate which comparison is correct and which is incorrect. Such uncertainty exists in Russian legislation since 1991, after the adoption of the Federal Law of the RSFSR ‘On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activity in Commodity Markets’ (Federal Law of the RSFSR ‘On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activity in Commodity Markets’). This leads to the fact that entrepreneurs rarely use this advertisement, courts and FAS Russia, when considering the appropriate category of cases, are forced to subjectively assess the situation and draw a conclusion about the correctness or incorrectness of the comparison made in advertising.


After analyzing the jurisprudence and practice of the FAS Russia, the authors managed to establish a number of criteria on which this or that comparison in advertising should be recognized as incorrect.

References

[1] Decision of the Arbitration Appeals Court No. 8 of 28.10.2011 on case No. А70-630/2011 // SPS ‘Consultant Plus’; Decision of the Arbitration Appeals Court No. 9 dated September 29, 2008 on case No. А40-14355/2008 // SPS ‘Consultant Plus’.
[2] Decision of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Central District of dated October 28, 2008 on case No. 36-2628/2006 // SPS ‘Consultant Plus’.
[3] Decision of the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation dated April 13, 2015 on case No. 3-01/06-2015. Available at: http://www.fas.gov.ru (Accessed: 02.11.2015).
[4] Decision of the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation dated September 30, 2013 on case No. 3-5-45/00-08-13 // SPS ‘Consultant Plus’.
[5] Decision of the Primorsky Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation on case No. 26 A-07/2014 dated January 29, 2015 // SPS ‘Consultant Plus’.
[6] Federal Law of the RSFSR ‘On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activity in Commodity Markets’ from March 22, 1991 No. 948-1 // Russian newspaper. July 27, 2006. No. 162. Bulletin of SND and VS RSFSR. April 18, 1991. No. 16. Article 499.
[7] Federal Law of the Russian Federation ‘On Advertising’ from March 13, 2006 No. 38-FZ (Edition dated March 8, 2015) // Russian newspaper. March 15, 2006. No. 51.
[8] Federal Law of the Russian Federation ‘On the protection of competition’ from July 26, 2006 No. 135-FZ (Edition dated October 5, 2015) // Russian newspaper. July 27, 2006. No. 162.
[9] Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb vom 03.07.2004: Official text. BGBl. – 2004. – I. – P. 1414.
[10] Gorodov, O.A. 2011. Industrial property law: textbook / edited by O.A.Gorodov. M.: Statut, 942 p.
[11] Inshakova, A.O., Goncharov, A.I., Mineev, O.A., and Sevostyanov, M.V. 2017. Amendments to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation: Contradictions of Theory and Practice. Russia and the European Union: Development and Perspectives, XIII: 147–153.
[12] Kondratovskaya, S.N. 2005. Legal problems of suppression of unfair competition in commodity markets: the dissertation of the candidate of jurisprudence: 12.00.03 / Svetlana Nikolaevna Kondratovskaya – Spb, 177 p.
[13] Marquart, E. 1998. Comparative analysis of unfair competition regulation in the Federal Republic of Germany, the European Union and the Russian Federation: Ph.D. thesis. M., P. 131.
[14] Molotnikov, A.E., and Kurakin, R.S. 2012. Actual problems of business law: monograph. Release II. M.: INFRA-M, P. 108.
[15] Nyunyaev, V.O. 2008. Legal regulation of advertising activities: the dissertation of the candidate of jurisprudence. SPb, P. 100.
[16] Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of North western district dated September 13, 2010 on case No. A44-1108/2010 // SPS ‘Consultant Plus’.
[17] Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the Volga Region dated February 6, 2008 on case No. A12-10691/07 // SPS ‘Consultant Plus’.
[18] Sack, R. 2001. Vergleichende Werbung nach der UWG Novelle / R. Sack // WRP., P. 327–335.
[19] Spector, E.I. 2007. Commentary to the Federal Law ‘On Advertising’ (itemized). M.: Justizinform, P. 47.
[20] The decision of the Commission of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation dated February 13, 2015 on case No. 3-5-41/00-08-14 // SPS ‘Consultant Plus’.
Published
2017-10-23
How to Cite
FROLOVA, Evgenia E. et al. Uncertainty of the Legal Regulation of Relations in the Sphere of Comparative Advertising: the Essence of the Problem and Possible Solutions. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, [S.l.], v. 8, n. 3, p. 792-798, oct. 2017. ISSN 2068-696X. Available at: <https://journals.aserspublishing.eu/jarle/article/view/1448>. Date accessed: 29 mar. 2024.