Company: JBB (Greater Europe) plc
Breach: No
Final Decision: 10 July 2001
Considered under the 2nd Edition of the Code.
Complaint summary
“After Shock fails to comply with a number of requirements under part 3 of the Code making it particularly attractive to those under 18. These include the bright red colouring, the name and the get up of the container (the bottle appears to be frosted) especially when the colour is taken into consideration. In addition the name ‘After Shock‘ provides a dominant theme to the high alcohol strength (40%) of the product.“
Complainant
Kingston-Upon-Thames Trading Standards
Decision
Under Code paragraph 3.1(b)
The brand name, product descriptor, packaging (including any containers and any external wrapping), labelling and point of sale materials of any alcoholic drink should not in any direct or indirect way have as its dominant theme the alcoholic strength or its relatively high alcohol content.
NOT UPHELD
Under Code paragraph 3.1(g)
The brand name, product descriptor, packaging (including any containers and any external wrapping), labelling and point of sale materials of any alcoholic drink should not in any direct or indirect way encourage purchase by sale or to under 18s.
NOT UPHELD
Under Code paragraph 3.1(h)
The brand name, product descriptor, packaging (including any containers and any external wrapping), labelling and point of sale materials of any alcoholic drink should not in any direct or indirect way be more likely to appeal to under 18s that adults.
NOT UPHELD
The Panel’s assessment
The Panel noted that the word “aftershock” was defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary as a lesser shock following the main shock of an earthquake. The Panel‘s view was that the name “After Shock” was likely to refer to a taste sensation, although it probably also indicated that the drink was alcoholic. The Panel did not think that there were any features of the product‘s packaging which placed undue emphasis on the strength of the product, or made its strength a dominant theme of the packaging of the product. The Panel considered that the words “hot & cool“, which appeared immediately above and below the name “After Shock” on the front label, supported an interpretation of the brand name as a reference to a taste sensation.
Hence, the Panel did not uphold the complaint under paragraph 3.1(b) of the Code.
The Panel did not think that the name of the product was more likely to appeal to under 18s than adults. The Panel considered that the bright red colour of the product, the frosted bottle and the words “hot & cool” might appeal to under 18s. However, the size and shape of the bottle were of a type normally used for bottles of spirits and the frosting was subdued. Overall, the Panel did not think that the product was more likely to appeal to under 18s than adults.
Hence, the Panel did not uphold the complaint under paragraph 3.1(h) of the Code.
The packaging indicated that the product was an adult drink and did not seem to the Panel to be designed to appeal to children.
The Panel did not believe that the impression conveyed by the product‘s packaging encouraged purchase by or sale to under 18s.
Hence, the Panel did not uphold the complaint under paragraph 3.1(g) of the Code.
Action by company
No action required.