Can you call your product "unmatched" in advertising?

The use of superlatives in advertising is a time-tested marketing tactic. But where is the line between laudatory commendation and prohibited comparative advertising? According to a ruling by the Brussels Court of Appeal on 24 April 2025, the use of a term such as "unmatched" is permissible as long as the advertising does not enable the average consumer to identify a specific competitor or its products.

The facts: a battle between dishwasher tablets

The case revolved around a commercial by the Reckitt company for its brand of dishwasher tablets Finish. The campaign described the product as "unmatched against caked-on stains". This claim was substantiated with a reference to a "test conducted in an external laboratory."

Competitor Procter & Gamble, manufacturer of Dreft dishwasher tablets, among others, held that this advertising was unlawful. Procter & Gamble went to court, arguing that the term "unmatched" by definition implied a comparison with all other products on the market, including theirs. According to them, there was prohibited comparative advertising. In the alternative, they argued that the advertising was misleading because the laboratory test would not prove the product's absolute superiority.

Appeal court decision

The Brussels Court of Appeals followed the reasoning of the first judge and ruled in favor of Reckitt (Finish) on all counts. Procter & Gamble's claim was dismissed.

According to the court, in this case there was no comparative advertising. Here, the term "unmatched" was not used in isolation, but always in the specific context of "against caked-on stains. The court held that this gives the term a superlative dimension rather than a comparative one.

The argument of misleading advertising was also dismissed. The advertising claimed support from "a test in an outside laboratory," not a specific, standardized test. Since Reckitt could prove the existence of such a test, consumers were not misled.

Legal analysis and interpretation

At the heart of this ruling lies the definition of comparative advertising, as provided in the Code of Economic Law (Article I.8, 14°). The crucial condition is that "a competitor or goods or services offered by a competitor are expressly or impliedly named“.

The court emphasizes that this identification must be concrete for the average, reasonably informed and circumspect consumer, and this without the need for additional research work. A vague reference to "other products on the market" does not suffice. Without this strict interpretation, the court stated, almost any endorsement could be considered comparative advertising.

Also interesting is the rejection of the market research submitted by Procter & Gamble. The court ruled that this research was methodologically flawed . Participants were first asked about their familiarity with various competing brands, so their attention was already drawn to a comparison context even before they saw the commercial. This is not representative of the perception of a typical consumer who sees the commercial without that preparation.

Regarding deception, the judgment recalls an important principle: an advertiser is not obliged to use scientific tests. However, if he does choose to refer to a test, then he must be able to proof the truthfulness of that specific claim. Reckitt did not claim to be the best by an industry standard (such as the IKW protocol), only that her claim was supported by an external lab test, which she could prove.

What this specifically means

• For advertisers: You have considerable freedom to tout your products with ringing superlatives ("unparalleled," "unbeatable," "exceptional"). The key is to do this without explicitly or implicitly referring to a specific competitor. As long as the average consumer does not immediately think of another brand, you will stay out of the crosshairs of comparative advertising.
• For competitors: Tackling a competitor on the basis of superlative claims is difficult. You will have to demonstrate that the advertising message, in the eyes of the consumer, inevitably leads to the identification of your company or your product. The mere fact that you are an important player in the market is insufficient for this.
• For consumers: Be aware that terms like "unmatched" are part of marketing language. A reference to a test provides some substantiation, but the test conditions may have been specifically chosen to obtain a favorable result.

Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

So is the use of "the best" always allowed?
Not necessarily. The term "the best" is often legally considered more directly comparative than a superlative like "unmatched." However, context is all-important. The court here focused on the fact that the claim was specific ("unmatched against caked-on stains"), which qualified it as a commendation rather than a pure comparison.

So what is prohibited comparative advertising?
Comparative advertising is permitted in principle, but must meet strict conditions under Article VI.17 of the Code of Economic Law. For example, it must not be misleading, must not cause confusion, must not damage the good name of a competitor, and must objectively compare essential characteristics. For example, an advertisement that incorrectly states "product X is 50% cheaper than product Y of brand Z" may be illegal if it is false.

Can a market survey ever serve as evidence in such a case?
Absolutely, but methodology is critical. The survey must measure the perceptions of the "normal" consumer in a realistic context. A survey that "directs" the participants or prepares them for comparison, as in this case, will be considered unrepresentative by a court and thus set aside.

Conclusion

This ruling confirms that advertisers may market their products with strong, laudatory wording. The line toward unlawful comparative advertising is crossed only when consumers can identify a concrete competitor. The burden of proof for this lies with the party who feels aggrieved and, as this ruling shows, that bar is particularly high.