Millwork distributors to be hit with a fine for selling ‘false and misleading’ marketing

MILLWORK DISTRIBUTORS have been ordered to pay a fine of €30,000 after being found guilty of misleading customers and the media over a marketing campaign.

Key points:The Court of Appeal has found that Millwork Distributors (MDFs) misled consumers about the efficacy of their product by misleading them about its safetyThe court also found that the MDFs misled the public by making misleading statements about the safety of the productMillwork Distributor, which manufactures Millwork’s products, was ordered to repay €30 million by the High Court in Dublin today.(Image: Getty)The appeal hearing heard that the company had advertised its product as ‘safe and effective’ for use on the lips, cheeks and nose, and to treat irritable and painful facial skin conditions.

Millwork distributors were also ordered to refund a further €10 million to customers who were misled into purchasing Millwork products.

But today the High Crown Court rejected Millwork distributor’s claims of ‘false advertising’ and ‘misleading’ the media.

It ruled that Millwills marketing was “based on the belief that the product is safe and effective” and that “the marketing of the products has been misleading to the public, in particular in relation to the safety and effectiveness of the Millwill product”.

The Court noted that the ‘misinformation’ contained in the advertisements was based on “false and fraudulent information” which “contrary to Millwalls own evidence and its own statements, is false and misleading in the sense that it does not represent the true health and safety of Millwilling products”.

The court noted that there was no evidence of any health problems or any adverse effects that Millworks products were capable of causing.

Millworks distributors had also made misleading statements to the media about the effectiveness of its products.

“This false and fraudulent advertising constitutes an intentional deception, which the court considers was intentional and purposeful,” the Court of Appeals ruling stated.

“In addition, Millwilla has not been entitled to summary judgment on the claim that the misleading advertising was based upon Millwiller’s own evidence or the representations made by Millwillas lawyers.

The Court’s ruling has serious implications for the safety, efficacy and effectiveness, and the safety safety of products, such as Millwilled products, that Millworth sells to the general public.

In its ruling today, the court stated that “millwork distributors have been found guilty in relation a misleading advertising campaign which Millwilms representatives undertook to promote and promote Millwilly products to the extent that it was to the detriment of the public.

“This is particularly so given that Mills lawyers made representations to the press which they knew to be false and untrue.”

The court added that the case was “not about Millwilias safety or effectiveness of Millwork, but the safety or efficacy of the advertising campaign”.

The case was heard in the High Courts, Dublin.

Related Post