Archive · 11 Sep 2026
Delhi High Court Restricts Ads Targeting HUL’s Vim, Surf Excel
The Delhi High Court considered advertisements about HUL cleaning products.
The ads discussed chemicals in products such as Vim and Surf Excel.
HUL said the ads unfairly made its products look dangerous.
The court said an ordinary shopper might think these products cause itching, redness, allergies, or eczema.
Judges said the ads were more than a normal comparison between competing products.
They said the campaign made HUL’s products seem scientifically proven to be unsafe.
Kwick Living said its own BECO products did not contain the highlighted chemicals.
The company also said it was giving Indian shoppers information that HUL discloses in some other countries.
The court ordered the ads to be removed within one week.
The Delhi High Court ordered Kwick Living to remove advertisements targeting Hindustan Unilever products Vim and Surf Excel.
The court said the campaign’s overall message could make consumers believe HUL products cause skin irritation and other health problems.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani ruled that the advertisements went beyond comparative advertising and denigrated HUL’s products.
HUL argued the campaign falsely portrayed its products as unsafe and infringed its copyright, trademarks, and trade dress.
Kwick Living said its BECO products lacked the chemicals highlighted in the ads and that the campaign presented truthful consumer information.
- Who
- Hindustan Unilever Limited sued Kwick Living before Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani of the Delhi High Court.
- What
- The court directed Kwick Living to remove the “War on What’s Hidden” advertising campaign targeting HUL products.
- When
- The order was dated September 10; HUL’s counsel said the campaign was launched on August 14, 2026.
- Where
- The dispute was heard in the Delhi High Court in India.
- Why
- HUL alleged that the campaign falsely claimed its products were unsafe, while Kwick Living said it was presenting truthful information about ingredients.
Hindustan Unilever’s Position
Kwick Living’s Position
Meaning of the advertisements
Hindustan Unilever’s Position
HUL said the campaign falsely conveyed that chemicals in its products cause skin irritation, allergic reactions, and other physical harm.
Kwick Living’s Position
Kwick Living said its advertisements truthfully identified chemicals that were present in HUL products and absent from its BECO alternatives.
Comparative advertising
Hindustan Unilever’s Position
HUL argued that the campaign went beyond lawful product comparison by targeting and commercially tarnishing its brands and consumers.
Kwick Living’s Position
Kwick Living argued that a trader may name a rival, use its mark and packaging as needed for comparison, and state information that is true.
Ingredient disclosures
Hindustan Unilever’s Position
HUL argued that the campaign selectively focused on its products and was not a genuine consumer-transparency effort.
Kwick Living’s Position
Kwick Living said HUL’s products such as Surf Excel and Persil disclose the highlighted chemicals in the United States and United Kingdom, but not in India because disclosure is not legally required there.
- Defendant
- Kwick Living
- Products targeted
- Hindustan Unilever’s Vim dishwashing product and Surf Excel washing powder
- Advertising campaign
- “War on What’s Hidden”
- Court’s finding
- The ads’ overall message could lead average consumers to believe HUL products cause skin irritation and other health problems.
- Legal characterization
- The campaign was held to go beyond comparative advertising and denigrate HUL’s products.
- Removal deadline
- Within one week of the order
- Presiding judge
- Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani