P&G, Unilever Sued For Deception Via Deodorant Packaging
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
Firms have no lawful justification for the nonfunctional slack fill in their deodorant packaging, which serves to mislead consumers into paying premium prices, according to class-action complaints filed in September in New York district courts.
You may also be interested in...
From January to June 2014, complaints against cosmetics firms accounted for 11% of total U.S. filings alleging unfair and deceptive acts and practices, compared with 7% in 2013, according to law firm Bryan Cave LLP. Most often filed in California state and federal courts, complaints target “natural” and performance claims, among others identified in a “Rose Sheet” infographic.
Plaintiffs against the prestige, “clinical” skin-care company are targeting anti-aging claims on its Rose Stem Cell Bio-Repair line and statements about hyaluronic acid’s ultra-moisturizing capabilities, used to market its Water Drench range. PTR faces false advertising class actions in California and New York federal courts, and the former case appears to be headed for trial.
Purell Battling Class Actions Over Disease Claims While World Scrambles To Increase Hand Sanitizer Supplies
Leading chemical firms, beauty and consumer health companies, even distilleries and medical marijuana cultivators are adapting operations to meet global demand for hand sanitizers amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Meanwhile, plaintiff’s attorneys are busy with multiple class actions against Purell manufacturer GOJO Industries for alleged false advertising following a January warning letter to the firm from the US FDA.