Top News

New Delhi. Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) has filed a petition in the Delhi High Court against Beco's campaign targeting Surf Excel and Vim. The High Court has sought a response from Beco and will hear both the parties before passing its verdict on the interim relief.

Read:- All three allegations against Justice Yashwant Verma are true, what did the Parliament's inquiry committee say in the report?

HUL has filed a petition in the court against Beko's parent company Quick Living (I) Pvt Ltd, accusing it of commercial defamation, trademark infringement and mis-selling. The controversy centers on Beko's recent 'War On What's Hidden' campaign, which was targeting Surf Excel Matic Liquid and Vim Dishwash Gel.

On Wednesday, Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani sought response from Beco on HUL's demand for an interim injunction against the advertisements. The court did not order Beko to immediately stop the advertising campaign and said it wanted to hear the company before taking a decision. The case will be heard again on August 21, while Beko has been asked to submit its reply and supporting materials by August 20.

What does Beko's campaign claim?

Beko's campaign compares its laundry and dishwashing products to Surf Excel and Vim using videos, social media posts, influencer promotions and outdoor advertisements. The company claimed that laboratory testing found benzisothiazolinone (BIT) and linear alkylbenzene sulfonate (LAS) in Surf Excel, while LAS was detected in Vim.

Read :- MP Pappu Yadav should immediately get additional PSO, Delhi High Court gives strict instructions to the Central Government

These advertisements have linked these ingredients to skin irritation and potential allergic reactions, which is the main claim of Beko's campaign. However, HUL has challenged the way these findings were presented to consumers.

HUL raised questions on BECO's testing

Senior advocate Amit Sibal, appearing for HUL, told the court that Beko's tests established the presence and concentration of certain ingredients but could not establish whether the finished product could actually cause skin irritation or allergic reaction when used normally.

HUL argued that testing a single ingredient is different from testing the safety of the entire product formulation. According to the company, Beko had not conducted the relevant safety testing that could support the claims made in its advertisements.

HUL also pointed out that LAS is a widely used surfactant in cleaning products as it helps in removing grease and oil. The company alleged that Beko deliberately targeted Vim and presented the ingredient in a way that could create a misleading impression among consumers.

Read :- And finally… I will return to the mountains after paying homage to Mahatma Gandhi at Rajghat: Sonam Wangchuk

Controversy regarding tagline and timing of the campaign

HUL has also objected to Beko identifying products in the campaign using its registered taglines, including Vim's 'Power of 100 Lemons' and Surf Excel's 'Daag Achhe Hain'. The company further alleged that the advertisements mocked its consumers and portrayed HUL as a company that misled consumers.

HUL claimed that Beco had launched the campaign on the night of August 14, just before the Independence Day sale. She argued that it was difficult to get immediate legal assistance due to public holidays. Beko has sought time to respond to the allegations. Now the court, after listening to both the parties, will decide whether a temporary ban should be imposed on the campaign.