360 / 522
tional requirement to not mention the goods, services or trade names
that are compared.
Given the express provision of Provisional Art. 1/3 LCP, until the
enactment of the Regulation, the Former Regulation’s application con-
tinued. As the LCP and the fLCP contains the same provision govern-
ing comparative advertising, the entry into force of the LCP does not
introduce a major amendment on the matter.
On the other hand, the Regulation, which abrogated the Former
Regulation by entering into force on 10 January 2015, includes an
innovative provision governing comparative advertising. Art. 8 of this
Regulation reads as follows:
“
ARTICLE 8 – (1) Comparative advertisements may only be
made if;
a) They do not deceive or mislead,
b) They do not result in unfair competition,
c) The goods and services that are subject to comparison have
the same qualities and features, or meet the same needs, or are
intended for the same purpose,
ç) A feature that benefits the consumer is compared,
d) One or more material, major, verifiable and typical quality
or qualities, which include the price, of the compared goods or
services are compared in an objective manner,
e) Objective, quantifiable assertions based on numeric data
are proven through scientific tests, reports or documents,
f) They do not denigrate or discredit the intellectual or indus-
trial property, commercial name, trade name, or other distinct
marks, goods, services, activities or other aspects of the com-
petitors,
g) Goods and services whose origins are specified are com-
pared with other goods and services from the same geograph-
ical location,
ğ) They do not result in confusion regarding the trademark,
trade name, commercial name, any other distinct mark, or
goods and services of the advertiser and the competitor.
344
NEWSLETTER 2015