Fairness Commission: complaints partially dismissed
The Fair Trading Commission has published 15 cases heard by the Third Chamber. Among other things, they involve complaints regarding the use of the Swiss cross in advertising, an anti-fur campaign, and objections based on sexism.
The Commission for Fair Trading (FC) has published 15 cases dealt with by the third chamber on its website following the expiry of the appeals deadline. They include complaints against the use of the Swiss cross in advertising, an anti-fur campaign and appeals on grounds of sexism. One complaint against the use of the Swiss cross was dismissed, according to a press release issued by the SC on Thursday. The use of the Swiss cross is unfair if at least 50 percent of the production costs are not incurred in Switzerland. This was undisputed in the specific case, which is why it was not deemed unfair.
A complaint against an animal protection association in western Switzerland was also dismissed. It had denounced the wearing of fur on posters with reproachful slogans and compared fur-wearing people to monsters. However, according to the third chamber of the LK, not every disparaging statement is unfair. For this to be the case, it must be "unnecessarily hurtful", which is not the case here.
However, one case of sexist advertising was deemed unfair: the manufacturer of a plant protection product advertised with an unclothed and only partially covered woman - according to the LK, there was no natural connection between the plant protection product and an unclothed woman. However, other complaints against sexist advertising were rejected, such as the one against advertisements for a music bar in which erotic dancing took place during Shrove Tuesday.
Other cases concerned misleading contract forms and harassment by fax and telephone, which were condemned by the LK as unfair.
A complaint against an animal protection association in western Switzerland was also dismissed. It had denounced the wearing of fur on posters with reproachful slogans and compared fur-wearing people to monsters. However, according to the third chamber of the LK, not every disparaging statement is unfair. For this to be the case, it must be "unnecessarily hurtful", which is not the case here.
However, one case of sexist advertising was deemed unfair: the manufacturer of a plant protection product advertised with an unclothed and only partially covered woman - according to the LK, there was no natural connection between the plant protection product and an unclothed woman. However, other complaints against sexist advertising were rejected, such as the one against advertisements for a music bar in which erotic dancing took place during Shrove Tuesday.
Other cases concerned misleading contract forms and harassment by fax and telephone, which were condemned by the LK as unfair.
