The Unfair Competition Act (UCA)

The primary regulation is the UCA, which contains:

• the basic rules, such as the general transparency principle in commercial communication;
• the prohibition of inaccurate or misleading claims about other companies and their products (Article 3(1)(a)) or one’s own products and services (Article 3(1)(b));
• the requirements for comparative advertising (Article 3(1)(e));
• the requirements for below-cost offers and the advertising related thereto (Article 3(1)(f));
• the requirements for offers with premiums and the advertising related thereto (Article 3(1)(g));
• the requirements for email marketing (Article 3(1)(o));
• certain requirements for sweepstakes and contests (Article 3(1)(t));
• the requirements for telemarketing (Article 3(1)(u, v and w)); and
• the requirements for “green claims” (Article 3(1)(x)).

Other Statutes

Other relevant laws are:

• the Ordinance on Price Declaration (OPD), when using price-related information in advertising;
• the Trade Mark Act, when displaying trade marks of third parties in advertising;
• the Copyright Act, when displaying pictures or videos of third parties in advertising; and
• legislation dealing with personality rights and data protection, such as the Data Protection Act (DPA), when displaying pictures of individuals or processing personal data for marketing purposes.

The most relevant industry-specific regulations are set out in 10.1 Regulated Products.

Soft Law

Soft laws are created by industry organisations and non-profit organisations. The most important soft laws regarding advertising are the so-called principles of the Swiss Fair Competition Commission (SFCC) regarding commercial communication. The principles are non-binding, but the SFCC may render decisions, which are published and may affect the reputation of the offender.

While sector-specific regulations are often enforced by the respective supervisory authorities, more general advertising regulations are enforced as set out below.

Civil Courts

The UCA and the other regulations mentioned in 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation provide for civil law remedies, which are enforced by civil courts. The remedies include:

• prohibition of imminent infringements;
• removal of infringements;
• declaration of the illegality of a behaviour; and
• damages.

Subject to strict conditions, preliminary injunctions may be requested.

Criminal Authorities

The UCA and the other general regulations mentioned in 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation provide for criminal sanctions in the case of an infringement, which are enforced by the cantonal criminal authorities. Article 23 of the UCA sets out that intentional infringement of Article 3 of the UCA (among other provisions) is sanctioned with imprisonment of up to three years or a monetary penalty of up to CHF540,000. Criminal courts only initiate investigations based on complaints by competitors, consumer organisations or consumers with the capacity to sue in the sense of Articles 9 and 10 of the UCA.

SFCC

The SFCC enforces its own principles (see 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation). The procedure is rather streamlined, including template complaint forms and the absence of oral hearings. It is initiated upon request and ends with a non-binding decision. The decisions are published.

Civil Law Actions

In the case of civil law litigation, the legal entity will be held liable where an employee or director committed the infringement in the course of the business activities of the entity. However, the UCA also permits litigation against individuals if no legal entity is involved or if an employee or director acts outside their business activity – eg, if a director posts deceptive claims about a competitor on their private X (formerly Twitter) account.

Injunctions and deletion requests are not dependent on culpability. Therefore, a claimant may, for example, ask an advertising agency or hosting provider to cease displaying deceptive advertising. The most important issue in claims against third parties is often whether they are effectively in control of the infringing activities (whether they have the competence to stop deceptive advertising, for instance).

Criminal Law Actions

Criminal law actions are, in principle, directed against individuals. The individual who is responsible for the criminal conduct will be liable.

If criminal conduct is committed in the course of the business activities of a legal entity, it is often not that easy to determine the responsible individual. In that case, criminal authorities often investigate the directors or employees who were in charge of marketing decisions in the first investigation phase.

Criminal proceedings are not often directed against third parties, unless, for example, the investigations reveal that such third parties might in effect be more responsible than the directors or employees of the advertiser.

Not all the relevant provisions use the term “advertising”, and the understanding of advertising or similar terms in the various provisions is not identical. What the provisions have in common is that they are based on a broad understanding of the term. For example, many of the provisions in the law against unfair competition are applicable to any “indications” as long as they are potentially relevant for competition. Similarly, self-regulation of the SFCC applies to “commercial communication”. This is defined as any measure that systematically influences a certain number of people in their attitude towards certain products or business relationships for the main purpose of concluding a legal transaction or preventing it.

There is no general rule requiring the pre-approval of advertising. However, there are special provisions in certain highly regulated areas, such as the advertising of certain pharmaceuticals (see Article 23 of the Ordinance on the Advertising of Pharmaceuticals).

In addition to the laws on intellectual property, Article 3(1)(d) of the UCA is particularly important in this respect. It prohibits measures that are likely to cause confusion with the goods, works, services or business operations of another party. Article 3(1)(e) is also important in practice; according to this provision, it is unfair to compare oneself or one’s goods, works or services in an unnecessarily condescending manner with other people’s goods, works or services. Furthermore, the use of a person’s name, image or voice is considered to be an interference with the personality rights of the person concerned and is therefore usually only permitted with their consent. Since personal data is concerned, the rules of the DPA also apply.

As mentioned in 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation and 1.2 Enforcement and Regulatory Authorities, the SFCC is one of the most important self-regulatory organisations governing and enforcing advertising rules. As the fees for the procedure with the SFCC are generally zero or rather low (compared to court fees), companies and individuals often file their complaints with the SFCC instead of civil courts.

Other industry-specific self-regulation is covered in 10.1 Regulated Products.

Whether consumers/private citizens have a private right of action depends on the infringed provisions:

• for infringement of the trade mark or copyright statutes, only the owners of the respective trade mark rights and copyrights have a private right of action;
• for infringement of the privacy laws, the data subject has a private right of action; and
• for infringement of the UCA, consumers have a private right of action if their economic interests are threatened or damaged by unfair behaviour (Article 9(1) of the UCA).

Remedies would be injunctions, deletion requests and damage claims (see 1.2 Enforcement and Regulatory Authorities).

Price Comparisons

Since 1 January 2025, a previous price may be advertised for an unlimited period, provided it was previously applied for 30 consecutive days. If this requirement is not met, the alternative rule continues to apply, limiting the duration of advertising to half the time that the earlier price was applied and to a maximum of two months.

In a judgment of 12 November 2025, the Federal Supreme Court confirmed significant financial consequences for misleading comparative pricing by a major Swiss retailer. In addition to a CHF5,000 fine, the Court upheld a compensatory claim of CHF1.5 million, reflecting an estimated unlawful financial advantage linked to the promotional practices. Although the case concerned conduct predating the 2025 revision of Article 16 of the OPD, it illustrates that the financial exposure arising from misleading discount advertising may extend well beyond the applicable criminal fine.

Green Claims

Also since 1 January 2025, Article 3(1)(x) of the UCA prohibits climate-related advertising claims that cannot be substantiated with objective and verifiable evidence. Recent Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) guidance has further clarified the high evidentiary threshold for climate claims (see 2.6 Environmental Claims).

Artificial Intelligence

On 12 February 2025, the Federal Council presented its position on the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI). Switzerland will not adopt a general AI Act comparable to the EU AI Act but will implement a sector-specific approach. The Council of Europe’s AI Convention will be incorporated into Swiss law, with legislative amendments limited to areas affecting fundamental rights, such as data protection and transparency. The Federal Council announced that a draft bill and implementation plan will be presented by the end of 2026, although informal communications suggest that the draft bill may not be presented until the first quarter of 2027.

Tobacco

On 20 June 2025, parliament adopted a revision of the Tobacco Products Act (TPA; subject to referendum), introducing stricter rules to protect minors, such as:

• bans on online ads unless effective age verification applies;
• mandatory age controls for online vendors; and
• bans in public places accessible to minors.

On 5 December 2025, the Federal Council opened the consultation on a revised Tobacco Products Ordinance, setting out the proposed implementing rules for these restrictions. In particular, the draft specifies acceptable methods of age verification for online advertising and sales, as well as access restrictions for advertising at sponsored events that may be attended by minors. Subject to completion of the legislative process, the new provisions are expected to enter into force at the beginning of 2027.

Platforms

On 29 October 2025, the Federal Council opened the consultation on a draft Federal Act on Communication Platforms and Search Engines. The draft applies to very large services and would introduce specific transparency requirements for online advertising, including clear labelling, information on the main parameters determining why advertisements are shown to particular users, and a publicly accessible advertising register. The proposal also contains transparency requirements for recommendation systems and would require at least one recommendation option that is not based on profiling. The scope and detailed requirements may still change substantially during the legislative process.

A particular challenge in Switzerland is the three different language regions, all of which also entail different cultural perceptions. In the authors’ experience, advertising in Switzerland appears reserved and is generally not very aggressive; this is more likely owing to cultural aspects than to legal practice. After all, the courts in Switzerland tend to be liberal and advertising-friendly compared to other countries (especially Germany). It can also be explained by the tendency to assume that the average addressee of an advertisement (for details, see 2.1 Deceptive or Misleading Claims) is reasonable and not in need of protection.

Commentators suggest that the change of government in the USA and its subsequent policies have also influenced Switzerland’s regulatory approach. There appears to be hesitation to introduce rules for the digital economy similar to those recently adopted in the EU, as such measures would primarily affect major US technology companies. Examples of this development can be seen in the Federal Council’s sector-specific approach to AI regulation and in the repeated postponement of the draft bill on large communication platforms.

According to case law and literature, only the content or meaning attributed to a claim by the average addressee is decisive, taking into account all the circumstances of the case. The understanding of the average addressee is determined in three steps.

• Determining the addressees to whom the information is directed (eg, their age, social position or location).
• Clarifying the knowledge and skills of the average addressee represented by the target group, including their:
1. education;
2. language skills;
3. previous knowledge or understanding;
4. low level of knowledge; and
5. attention (eg, place of claim, advertising medium and advertising situation).
• Assessing how the average addressee understands the claims.

This assessment is a legal question and requires an objective judgement. Therefore, “misleading or inaccurate rates” based on surveys cannot be used as a means of proof for the relevant understanding. However, surveys submitted by the claimant may nonetheless affect the assessment by the judges.

The UCA – in particular, Article 3(1)(b) – may cover both express and implied claims. Whether an implied communication is a claim in the sense of the UCA must be assessed based on the understanding of the average addressee (see 2.1 Deceptive or Misleading Claims). In general, only verifiable factual statements that are assessable with evidence qualify as claims in the sense of Article 3(1)(b) of the UCA, contrary to pure value judgements. However, value judgements may disparage others and thereby violate Article 3(1)(a).

Claim substantiation depends on the nature of the claim in question. Substantiation for misleading claims is different to substantiation for inaccurate claims. As mentioned under 2.1 Deceptive or Misleading Claims, it is decisive whether or not the average addressee is misled; the standard is therefore not whether a substantial part of the addressees might be misled.

In ordinary proceedings, the court must be convinced, based on the evidence submitted, that an infringement is highly probable (almost 100% probability). In cases of preliminary injunctions, the claimant must convince the court that an infringement is plausible. However, Swiss courts tend to apply a rather high standard.

The same standards apply as in the assessment of other advertising methods (see 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation). Therefore, it is particularly significant that the product actually has the characteristics presented and that the product demonstration does not mislead about the characteristics of the product. Provisions specific to the product must also be observed.

The same standards apply as in the assessment of other advertising methods (see 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation). The SFCC has specified these standards (see Principle B.7), and considers testimonials to be unlawful if they are not limited to information about the product and cannot be substantiated as to their content and originator. References to fictional persons must also be avoided in commercial communication, even if there can be no ambiguity about the fiction. In addition, there are specific regulations for regulated products, such as medicinal products.

The new provision in Article 3(1)(x) of the UCA entered into force on 1 January 2025, and prohibits claims about a company and its goods, works or services in relation to their climate impact that cannot be proven on objective and verifiable bases. The provision can be seen as codifying a main aspect of the case law of the SFCC, which is why its decisions (and its new guidelines – see below) will support companies in their compliance efforts.

The wording of Article 3(1)(x) is very broad and covers any form of claims related to climate impact – ie, not only “climate-friendly” and “CO2-neutral”, but also claims such as “sustainable”, “CO2-positive” or “environmentally friendly”. When using such claims, companies must meet a high standard of proof in the future. This is a tightening of the general principle in Article 13a of the UCA. If a company is unable to provide evidence to support the correctness of a claim (ie, also in cases where there is a lack of objective and widely recognised methods of measurement), it should refrain from using the claim.

The SFCC guideline for commercial communication with environmental references summarises the requirements for compliance with the principles of clarity and correctness. For the clarity principle to be met, it must, among other things, be clear whether the claim refers to:

• a product;
• a part of a product or certain aspects of a product; or
• all the advertiser’s/company’s activities or a specific part of the advertiser’s/company’s activities.

Regarding vague or imprecise claims about environmental impact, which could have different meanings, the SFCC emphasises that they may only be made if they can be proven to be true in all reasonably foreseeable circumstances without any limitation. Moreover, green claims may only be made if it is clear that the efforts of the advertiser go beyond the requirements prescribed by law or industry-specific regulations for the product of the advertiser, or that the efforts of the advertiser go beyond those efforts that are customary for corresponding products or activities of the advertiser.

It is worth highlighting that the guidelines also define how certain common claims are generally understood by the average consumer: for example, claims such as “sustainable”, “environmentally friendly”, etc, refer to environmental/climate-related measures that clearly go beyond legal or industry-specific requirements.

On 2 March 2026, the FOEN published its long-awaited enforcement aid on climate-related information under the UCA. The guidance builds on the SFCC guidelines and existing case law, and provides further guidance on their practical application. It confirms that climate claims are subject to strict verifiability requirements, with recognised standards such as the Greenhouse Gas Protocol potentially serving as relevant reference points. According to FOEN, product-related claims such as “Product X is CO2-neutral” must not be justified by offsetting measures outside the product life cycle, as this may suggest that the relevant reductions were achieved within the product’s own life cycle. FOEN also advises against broad terms such as “climate-neutral” or “climate-positive”, which it considers not currently factually verifiable.

The key question regarding disclosures in advertising is whether an advertisement is recognisable as a commercial communication without disclosure. In its principles (see Principle B.15), the SFCC declares commercial communication without disclosure to be unfair if the commercial communication is not clearly identifiable as such. If content is not clearly recognisable as a commercial communication, the relationship with the third party must be disclosed. This applies in particular if the third party provides sponsoring services or comparable or similar payments, or contributions in kind.

In (more recent) case law, however, the SFCC has been relatively liberal and often assumes, especially in the case of very prominent advertisers (eg, Roger Federer), that the commercial character is recognisable and thus no disclosure is required.

The Tobacco Product Act (TPA)

According to Article 12 of the TPA, the following information is prohibited on tobacco products for smoking and on their packaging:

• information, trade marks and figurative signs that create the impression that a particular product is less harmful than others, such as “light”, “mild”, “organic”, “natural” or “without additives”; and
• the nicotine, tar or carbon monoxide content of the product’s emissions.

Advertising for tobacco products is also subject to further restrictions under the TPA. In particular, Article 18 prohibits advertising that contains price-comparative statements or promises of gifts or other benefits.

Health-Related Claims

These are generally prohibited for any products other than medicinal products. However, Annex 14 of the Ordinance on Foodstuffs Information includes specific permitted health-related claims for foodstuffs.

Swissness Provisions

The so-called Swissness provisions in the Trade Mark Act (Articles 47 et seq) and the ordinances thereto govern the use of Swiss claims, Swiss symbols and other Swiss indications of origin. The use of the Swiss flag is further regulated in the Coat of Arms Act. In general, the use of Swiss indications of origin must not be deceptive. Consequently, the Swissness rules set out when a product is considered to have been manufactured in Switzerland or when a service is sufficiently “Swiss”. With regard to foodstuffs, 80% of the content must be of Swiss origin. However, there are exceptions. Regarding industry products, at least 60% of the manufacturing costs must arise in Switzerland. The ordinance clarifies how to calculate the manufacturing costs.

There are no special laws in Switzerland addressing stereotyping in advertising or inclusion, diversity and equity more generally; the same general provisions mentioned under 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation apply. However, SFCC Principle B.8 specifically addresses gender-discriminatory commercial communication, and qualifies it as unfair where it violates the dignity of a gender. This may be the case, in particular, where advertising attributes stereotypical characteristics to a gender in a way that:

• calls into question the equality of genders;
• depicts submission, exploitation, violence or dominance as acceptable; or
• fails to exercise particular restraint when children or young people are portrayed.

The principle also covers situations where there is no natural connection between the person embodying the gender and the advertised product, where the person is used merely as a decorative eye-catcher, or where sexuality is depicted in an inappropriate manner.

In general, the same standards apply as in the assessment of other advertising (see 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation). However, as explained in 2.1 Deceptive or Misleading Claims, advertising must be assessed based on the understanding of the average addressee. It follows from this that a stricter standard generally applies to advertising to children. In addition, special laws have been enacted that prohibit or restrict the specific advertising of certain products to children – for example, in relation to alcohol and tobacco products. For tobacco products, further restrictions are expected to enter into force in 2027, under which advertising must also generally not be accessible to minors (see 1.9 Regulatory and Legal Trends).

There are no special laws or comprehensive guidance regarding dark patterns and, therefore, the same standards apply to dark patterns in advertising as in the assessment of other advertising methods (see 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation). However, in its guidance on cookies and similar technologies, the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (FDPIC) notes that misleading designs and wording (referred to as “dark patterns” or “nudging”) may render consent invalid.

In general, the same rules apply to sponsor identification or branded content as for other advertising methods. Therefore, the commercial nature of the content as well as all sponsors must be clearly recognisable (see 2.7 Disclosures). The principles of the SFCC explicitly state that the sponsoring of editorial contributions is unlawful if it is not possible for the audience to recognise which parts of the publication are sponsored and who the sponsor is (Principle B.15a).

In addition, detailed sector-specific regulations apply to advertising on TV and radio (in particular, see Article 20 of the Radio and Television Ordinance). For example, such regulations stipulate that every mention of a sponsor must establish a clear link between the sponsor and the programme. The sponsor’s name must not directly encourage the conclusion of legal transactions for goods or services. During the broadcasting of a television programme, a brief reminder of the sponsorship relationship may be provided (an insert). One insert per sponsor is permitted per ten minutes of broadcasting time. Inserts are not permitted in children’s programmes.

There is no specific statutory provision dealing with native advertising; the general provisions mentioned in 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation apply. However, SFCC Principle B.15 concretises the general provisions and sets out special rules regarding the separation of commercial communication from editorial content. Commercial communication must be recognisable as such and must be flagged as sponsored/advertising or similar, and must be strictly separated from editorial content.

Comparative advertising is prohibited if it is executed in an inaccurate, misleading, unnecessarily disparaging or unnecessarily imitating manner, or where it favours third parties in competition in a corresponding manner (Article 3(1)(e) of the UCA). Article 3(1)(e) of the UCA even applies if no specific competitor or product is mentioned (indirect comparison) – it is sufficient that the advertiser’s own products and services are compared, even implicitly, with other specified or specifiable products and services.

Stricter rules apply to price comparisons in B2C advertising (see 7.4 Free and Reduced-Price Offers).

As long as the requirements mentioned in 4.1 Specific Rules or Restrictions are met, the use of competitors’ names, trade marks or packaging will regularly be allowed.

As discussed in more detail in 1. Legal Framework and Regulatory Bodies, advertisers affected by comparative advertising may challenge claims through civil litigation, criminal law proceedings or complaints to the SFCC.

There are no special rules related to ambush marketing in Switzerland and, therefore, the general rules apply (see 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation). For ambush marketing, Article 3(1)(e) of the UCA is of particular importance and the extent to which the advertiser compares itself, its goods, works or services in an unnecessarily condescending manner with the goods, works or services of other companies must be assessed. The interpretation of the term “compare” is very broad, and therefore other measures are prohibited that unnecessarily aim to transfer the image of someone else to oneself or to one’s own products.

There is no specific statute dealing with advertising in social media; the general provisions mentioned in 1.1 Primary Laws and Regulation apply. Furthermore, SFCC Principle B.15(1) requires that advertising for third parties in posts on social media platforms must be recognisable as advertising.

It should be noted that the average addressee of advertising on digital media might differ from other communication channels (see 2.1 Deceptive or Misleading Claims). This was emphasised by the SFCC in decisions regarding influencer marketing on Instagram, in which it mentioned that the addressees of the respective posts were the followers of the Instagram account of the respondent. The average addressee was described as follows:

“[A] follower decides for themselves which persons or companies they want to follow. It can be assumed that the average Swiss followers of the respondent’s account are interested in the respondent’s sports history and life. A follower wants to learn more about the respondent, their career and life by following the Instagram account. They are more interested in and better informed about the respondent than someone who is not a follower of the account.”

See, for example, appeal decision of 6 May 2020 (No 154/19 and 159/19), reference No 14.

Injunction and deletion claims are generally independent of the culpability of the advertiser. Consequently, an infringed individual or legal entity may initiate litigation against the advertiser operating the relevant website or social media channel and potentially also against other entities that contribute causally to an infringement (eg, a platform provider), and ask them to stop the posting of third-party content on the advertiser’s website or social media channels and to have it removed.

In contrast, damage claims are generally not available against an advertiser or other entity for illicit third-party content. However, if the advertiser or other relevant entity was notified about the illicit content and did not remove it, said entity may become liable (jointly with the main infringer) for the illicit post. In that case, a damage claim might be possible.

There are generally no special requirements for disclosure regarding advertising on social media as opposed to traditional media (see 2.7 Disclosures). However, the implementation of the disclosure requirements may differ, and must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

No unique rules or regulations apply to the use of the major social media platforms in Switzerland. However, SFCC Principle B.15 concretises certain general principles in the UCA for social media platforms (see 5.1 Special Rules Applicable to Social Media and 5.5.1 Special Rules/Regulations on Influencer Campaigns).

Data Privacy Laws

The collection of email addresses is subject to the DPA. This means that the general data-processing principles (fairness, proportionality, transparency, purpose limitation, storage limitation, accuracy, integrity and confidentiality – see Articles 6 and 8) must be complied with, and information must be provided about the data processing (see Articles 19–21). Unless the general data-processing principles are violated and no special categories of personal data (eg, health data – see Article 5 littera c) are disclosed to third parties, no legal basis (such as consent) is required under Swiss data privacy laws (however, see below regarding the UCA).

Please note that the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) might apply to entities with a registered seat in Switzerland (Article 3(2) of the GDPR), and might therefore affect data collection and processing for email marketing. As this chapter focuses on Swiss law, there will be no further evaluation of the GDPR requirements for email marketing.

In August 2024, the Federal Council announced the conclusion of the Swiss–US Data Privacy Framework, a counterpart to the EU–US Data Privacy Framework. This new framework will significantly ease data transfers between Switzerland and the USA, facilitating co-operation with US-based companies, including those in the marketing sector. Previously, the USA was not considered to have adequate data protection under Swiss and EU laws, necessitating complex compliance measures for companies transferring personal data to the USA, such as Data Transfer Impact Assessments.

The new framework allows US providers to self-certify, removing the need for additional compliance measures when transferring data to certified providers. However, general data protection provisions still apply, and data subjects must be informed about transfers. The framework’s future remains uncertain owing to potential legal challenges, like those that annulled the previous Privacy Shield agreement. Companies are advised to take precautions, such as by using Standard Contractual Clauses, to mitigate risks in case the agreement is invalidated. Further monitoring of legal developments is recommended.

UCA

Article 3(1)(o) of the UCA deals with email marketing, and generally requires an opt-in by the recipient. The recipient must also be informed about the option to unsubscribe, and such an opt-out must be possible in an easy manner. Finally, the sender must indicate its correct name and address.

There is an exemption from this general rule with respect to existing customers. Opting in is not necessary for email marketing to recipients in cases where they have been informed prior to the first marketing mail about the opt-out right, and if the emails only contain information about the company’s own products or services, which are similar to the ones purchased or ordered by the respective recipient.

Sanctions

The DPA provides for criminal sanctions in the case of an intentional infringement of certain provisions (in particular, violation of the duty to inform). In principle, these sanctions are directed against the responsible natural person and not against the company. Furthermore, the FDPIC may investigate data-processing activities and impose a temporary or definitive limitation, including a ban on processing or a deletion of data. Data subjects may also initiate civil litigation and ask for injunctions (see Article 32 of the DPA and 1.8 Private Right of Action for Consumers). As the costs for litigation in Switzerland may be quite substantial, data subjects tend to file complaints with the FDPIC.

In the case of an infringement of Article 3(1)(o) of the UCA, the affected individual may file a complaint with the civil court and ask for an injunction and for removal of their mail address from the mailing list (Article 9 of the UCA). Damage claims are rare, as the claimant has to prove effective financial damage. No such civil litigation is on record. There have been a few criminal proceedings dealing with infringement of the UCA.

Intentional infringement of Article 3(1)(o) of the UCA is sanctioned with imprisonment for up to three years or a monetary penalty (Article 23 of the UCA). Prison is not realistic for such infringements, but penalties might be awarded. However, in the published case law, the criminal authorities have followed a rather liberal approach.

SFCC

Principle C.4(2) No 5 and (3) repeat Article 3(1)(o) of the UCA. Consequently, complaints against illicit email marketing can also be filed with the SFCC, which acts upon the request of competitors, recipients of the marketing communication or consumer organisations. It can decide that the marketing is illegal, and may publish its decision with full disclosure of the name of the company.

The SFCC decides more cases of alleged illegal email marketing than the civil courts and criminal authorities.

In relation to automated telemarketing, the same rules apply as for email marketing (see 6.1 Email Marketing).

For other types of telemarketing, Article 3(1)(u) of the UCA sets out that telemarketing to recipients with a respective opt-out notice in the telephone registry or to recipients that have no entry in the registry is prohibited, unless there is a business relationship with the recipient or the recipient has given informed consent. It is also prohibited to make advertising calls without displaying a telephone number that is listed in the telephone directory and is authorised to be used (Article 3(1)(v) of the UCA). Not only is it prohibited to make such marketing calls, but it is also explicitly prohibited to rely on information obtained as a result of a breach of these provisions (Article 3(1)(w) of the UCA). Sanctions for this infringement are the same as outlined in 6.1 Email Marketing.

Similar rules are included in SFCC Principle C.4(2) No 4. The SFCC has to deal with illicit telemarketing on a regular basis.

Since 1 September 2024, health insurers are specifically prohibited from making cold calls through their employees or external partners. A cold call is defined as initial contact with potential customers:

• with whom no business relationship exists;
• who have not been insured for more than 36 months;
• who have exercised their opting-out right; or
• where the contact is not based on a referral by a third party known to the potential customer(s).

Breaches of these rules may lead to fines of up to CHF100,000.

Marketing communication spread by means of text messaging is subject to the same rules as email marketing; see 6.1 Email Marketing.

The general rules for targeted/interest-based advertising are set out in the DPA. Whether additional rules apply must be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Should the effective communication take place in the form of (personalised) email marketing, the specific regulations regarding email marketing would apply as well (see 6.1 Email Marketing).

Data Privacy Law

When using web tracking or retargeting tools, it is difficult to ensure that no personal data within the meaning of the DPA is processed, even if at first sight the tools appear to process only IP addresses. The FDPIC therefore recommends assuming that personal data is processed in cases of doubt. In this case, the general data-processing principles apply as set out in Article 6 of the DPA, as well as the duty to inform (Articles 19–21 of the DPA):

• the data subjects must be informed about the data processing (in particular, about the identity and contact details of the controller, the collected data, the purpose of the processing and the recipients of the data);
• the data processing must be proportionate (ie, only as much data as is necessary for the purpose may be collected and processed); and
• personal data may only be processed for a specified purpose and only in a way that is compatible with that purpose.

Consent may only be mandatory if the processing violates the general data-processing principles or if special categories of data (eg, health data) are disclosed to third parties (Article 30 of the DPA).

Furthermore, a special provision applies to the use of cookies and similar technologies, according to which information must be provided about the purposes of cookies as well as the possibility of rejecting them (see Article 45c of the Telecommunications Act). In most cases of interest-based advertising, the interplay of the above rules will lead to the requirement to use a cookie banner that at least transparently informs about the data processing. This was recently confirmed by new FDPIC guidelines on the use of cookies and similar technologies. It should also be noted that the stricter provisions of EU law with the opt-in principle may also apply to Swiss companies.

There are no specific regulations with regard to the processing of personal data of children. However, the fact that the personal data of children is collected must be taken into account, particularly in connection with the transparency principle. Information provided to children about data processing must be written in a way that can be understood by children. If consent is needed for data processing, both consent from the child and approval from their parents is required in the case of minors.

Apart from the DPA itself, the most important privacy-related provisions for advertising are contained in the UCA and the Telecommunications Act, and have already been explained in previous sections.

General Requirements

The following requirements must be complied with when conducting sweepstakes and contests.

Data privacy laws

The processing of personal data in connection with sweepstakes or contests must comply with data privacy laws. Therefore, participants must be informed about the processing of their personal data in connection with the conduct of the sweepstake or contest. If the personal data is also used for additional purposes, participants must be informed about those purposes in a transparent manner and consent might be necessary – in particular for email marketing.

Unfair competition laws

Unfair competition laws require transparent information about the sweepstake/contest – in particular about eligibility for participation, the participation period, how to participate, the prize, etc.

Trade mark and copyright laws

Trade mark and copyright laws must be considered if third-party trade marks and pictures are used – for example, for the description of the prize if it is a third-party branded product.

The Swiss Gambling Act (Geldspielgesetz)

Sweepstakes and contests are most likely to be qualified as money games, which are generally required by statute to have an approval/licence. However, certain sweepstakes and contests are excluded from the Gambling Act, such as sweepstakes and contests with free participation, which therefore do not need approval. However, the free participation option must provide the participants with an equal winning chance to that of paid participants. There have not yet been any decisions in this respect.

Even if participation in a sweepstake or contest were not free (ie, the participants had to purchase a product or conclude another contract in order to participate), the respective sweepstakes and contests could be exempted from the approval requirement. Short-term promotional lotteries and games of skill that do not involve the risk of excessive gambling, and where participation is exclusively through the purchase of goods or services offered at no more than market price, are exempted from the Swiss Gambling Act (Article 1(2)(d)).

The Swiss Gambling Act distinguishes between contests of skill and games of chance (lotteries).

• Contests of skill are defined as money games in which the winning chance depends entirely or mainly on the skill of the player (Article 3 littera d of the Swiss Gambling Act). Money games are defined as games in which there is the prospect of a monetary gain or other monetary advantage in return for a monetary stake or the conclusion of a legal transaction (Article 3 littera a).
• Games of chance or lotteries are defined as money games that are open to an unlimited or at least a high number of people, and where the result is determined by one and the same random draw or by a similar procedure (Article 3 littera b).

Money games, including contests of skill and games of chance, are subject to an approval or licence (Article 4). However, as mentioned in 7.1 Sweepstakes and Contests, money games with free participation and certain sweepstakes and contests are exempted from these obligations. It is advisable and common practice to design promotional sweepstakes and contests in a manner that exempts them from the approval requirement.

Games of chance and contests of skill for promotional purposes do not generally need to be registered or approved if they are designed in a proper manner (see 7.1 Sweepstakes and Contests and 7.2 Contests of Skill and Games of Chance). If such games or contests are not exempted from the Swiss Gambling Act, an approval or licence is needed.

With respect to the approval process, the statute distinguishes between large money games and small money games. Large money games are games of chance or contests of skill that are executed either in an automated manner, in more than one Swiss canton or online. Other contests and games of chance are small money games.

Large Money Games

Large money games must be approved by the inter-cantonal money game authority (GESPA) (Article 21 of the Swiss Gambling Act). Approval is subject to certain requirements, such as a registered seat in Switzerland, good reputation, financial stability, etc (Articles 22 and 24 et seq). The main issue is that the cantons may determine the maximum numbers of organisers for money games. This means that an organiser might not receive an approval even if it complies with all requirements.

Small Money Games

Approval for small money games is granted by the cantonal authority in the canton in which the money game is executed (see Articles 32 et seq of the Swiss Gambling Act).

Sanctions

The execution of money games without the necessary approval is subject to criminal sanctions. Articles 130 et seq of the Swiss Gambling Act distinguish between large and small money games as follows:

• the intentional illegal execution of large money games is sanctioned with imprisonment for up to three years or a monetary penalty; and
• the intentional execution of small money games without approval is sanctioned with a monetary penalty of up to CHF500,000.

UCA

Article 3(1)(b) of the UCA requires that information about prices must not be inaccurate, deceptive or misleading. Furthermore, Article 18 of the UCA sets forth that the declaration of price reductions in a misleading manner is unfair.

OPD

Article 18 of the UCA is concretised by the OPD. Reduced-price offers are subject to several requirements, as set out in Articles 16 et seq of the OPD.

The ordinary price, as well as the reduced one, must be indicated. Which products the reduced price applies to must be specified. However, specification is not needed if the reduced price applies to several products, product groups or entire assortments. In that case, which categories of groups the reduced price applies to must solely be specified (eg, “50% off all coffee capsule products”).

In addition, the requirements in Article 16 of the OPD regarding price comparisons must be complied with. However, on 1 January 2025, a revised version of Article 16 entered into force (see 1.9 Regulatory and Legal Trends), significantly easing the conditions for comparative price advertising. A previous price may now be advertised for an unlimited period, provided it was applied for 30 consecutive days. If this requirement is not met, the alternative rule continues to apply, limiting the duration of advertising to half the time the earlier price was charged and to a maximum of two months.

According to the alternative rule, a reduced-price campaign may only last for a maximum of two months. The campaign period is calculated in the following way: if the ordinary price prior to the reduced price was charged for two months, the reduced price may last for one month (50% of the period for which the ordinary price was charged prior to the campaign). This also means that a new reduced-price campaign for the same product cannot immediately follow another one.

Additional Requirements

Reduced-price campaigns must also comply with Article 3(1)(f) of the UCA. Products and services must not be offered under the cost price repeatedly and in a manner that deceives the consumer about the performance of the advertising company or competitors.

Finally, a free offer must comply with Article 3(1)(g) of the UCA if it is a premium offer – eg, “purchase one product X and receive another product for free” (ie, as premium). The premium must not deceive the consumer about the effective value of the offer. There is no deception if the value of the main product and the premium are known or declared.

Generally, such provisions are subject to contractual freedom. However, mandatory legal provisions and the following restrictions must be observed.

Contractual relationships between a marketer and a consumer are often governed by general terms and conditions. Based on Article 8 of the UCA and the case law of the Federal Supreme Court, general terms and conditions can be subject to ex post judicial control. In particular, this control applies the so-called rule of unusualness: a clause whose content the approving party did not expect and could not reasonably have expected under the circumstances shall not be valid. This can be the case if a clause is unusual and unrelated to the business.

According to the Federal Court, automatic contract renewals are not unusual per se. However, whether a provision is unusual is determined from the point of view of the approving party at the time of the contract’s conclusion.

Furthermore, Article 27 of the Swiss Civil Code and Articles 19 and 20 of the Code of Obligations must be taken into account both for general terms and conditions and for individual agreements. These provisions prevent an excessive contractual binding of a contractual party. This could become relevant in the event of continued renewal of a contract and the associated obligation that a consumer enters into.

A parliamentary initiative to restrict automatic renewal of service contracts has been debated in parliament, but both chambers of parliament rejected an amendment to the Swiss Civil Code.

There are no specific rules or guidance regarding the use of AI in the development of advertising content. The general rules apply – in particular, that the content must not be false or misleading (see 2.1 Deceptive or Misleading Claims).

There are no specific rules or guidance related to making such claims. The general rules apply, in particular that the claim must not be false or misleading (see 2.1 Deceptive or Misleading Claims).

There are no specific rules or guidance regarding the use of chatbots; the general rules apply, in particular the provisions of the DPA. It is worth highlighting that there is a specific duty to inform about automated individual decisions that produce legal effects or similarly significantly effects (Article 21(1) of the DPA). In such cases, the data subject shall also have the opportunity to state their position upon request, and may request that the automated individual decision be reviewed by a natural person (Article 21(2)).

If a chatbot is used, it should therefore be assessed whether automated decisions with legal or other significant implications are involved and, if so, whether the requirements can be met or whether an exception applies (such as informed consent of the data subject). It should also be noted in this context that consent, if required, must be explicit if the data processing by a chatbot involves “high-risk profiling”. Profiling is defined as any automated processing of personal data consisting of using such data to evaluate certain personal aspects relating to a natural person – in particular, to analyse or predict aspects relating to that natural person’s:

• performance at work;
• economic situation;
• health;
• personal preferences;
• interests;
• reliability;
• behaviour; or
• location or change of location.

See Article 5 littera f of the DPA.

High-risk profiling is defined as profiling that entails a high risk for the personality or fundamental rights of the data subject by leading to a combination of data that allows an assessment of essential aspects of the personality of a natural person (Article 5 littera g of the DPA).

There are no specific rules or regulations regarding the advertising, marketing or sale of cryptocurrency and/or NFTs; the application of rules and regulations depends on the legal qualification of the crypto-asset in question. In particular, if a crypto-asset qualifies as a security, the rules regarding offering and advertising under the Financial Services Act (FinSA) and the Financial Services Ordinance (FinSO) have to be observed – specifically, Articles 35 et seq and Article 68 of the FinSA.

Pursuant to Articles 35 et seq of the FinSA, anyone making a public offer of securities is required to publish a prospectus containing key information for investors. Article 68 sets out specific provisions for the advertising of financial instruments, including the requirement to clearly identify the advertisement as such and to refer to the prospectus.

In specific cases, if a crypto-asset would qualify as a unit of a collective investment scheme, the specific rules of the Collective Investment Scheme Act (CISA) apply.

However, the rules of the UCA have to be adhered to in all cases.

There are no specific rules or regulations regarding advertising within the metaverse; the regulations that apply to advertising in general also apply to advertising activities in the metaverse. In this regard, the UCA and the guidelines on fairness in commercial communication provided by the SFCC are particularly relevant.

According to the UCA and the previously mentioned guidelines, commercial communication (advertising) should not:

• disparage or deliberately ridicule other companies, persons, products or commercial activities;
• present a person or organisation as more favourable (than others) by communicating inaccurate or misleading representations or statements;
• imitate other (pre-existing) products or services in a way that might lead to confusion with said pre-existing products or services;
• use inaccurate or subjective test results in order to promote a product or service;
• use inaccurate or unlawful indications of origin (eg, the Swiss cross for products that do not originate from Switzerland); or
• disguise the commercial purpose of advertising (eg, where an influencer receives a remuneration for the promotion of a product, but their followers are led to believe that it is a personal recommendation or an objective product review).

Furthermore, the UCA entails rather strict provisions on promotional raffles/lotteries (eg, Article 3(1)(t)) and aggressive product marketing activities, which also apply to the metaverse.

Even though advertising in the metaverse is widely discussed in legal articles, it has not been discussed by the authorities or the legislature.

Alcohol

The Ordinance on Beverages sets forth the criteria to be complied with for specific beverages – ie, it determines when a beverage may be marketed as mineral water, fruit water, alcohol-free beer and so on. It also sets out certain restrictions for the design of the labels, marketing materials and the use of geographic origins (eg, whiskey).

The Federal Statute on Spirits (the “Alcohol Act”) contains two provisions dealing with (and restricting) the marketing and advertising of spirits. Article 41 sets out (among others) that:

• spirits may not be sold or marketed to consumers under 18 years of age;
• below-cost prices are prohibited; and
• free samples to an unspecified consumer circle are prohibited.

Article 42b of the Alcohol Act contains specific restrictions for advertising, such as the requirement that advertising for spirits must only contain information that relates directly to the product or its features – for example, in advertising for spirits it is prohibited to include pictures of an attractive sandy beach. It is also prohibited to display spirit adverts in specific locations, such as on public transport. Another important restriction is the prohibition of providing spirits as prizes in a sweepstake.

Banking

Article 1 of the Federal Statute on Banks and Savings Banks sets out that the terms “bank” or “banking institute” must only be used in the advertising (and commercial correspondence in general) of institutions that are subject to the statute and supervised by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority. Article 4quater prohibits misleading or intrusive advertising by the Swiss seat of a banking institution. Article 3 of the Ordinance on Banking Institutions sets out that only institutions with a banking licence are permitted to advertise the acceptance of deposits from the public.

Chemicals

Article 20 of the Federal Statute on Protection against Dangerous Substances and Preparations sets out that the advertising of dangerous chemicals or chemical mixtures must not mislead the public about the danger of the products, nor lead to an improper use. Article 60 of the Ordinance on Chemicals prohibits the use of specific terms in the advertising for such products, such as “non-toxic” and “eco-friendly”.

Medical Products and Devices

Article 31 of the Federal Statute on Medicinal Products and Medical Devices sets out as a principle that it is permitted to advertise all types of medicinal products if the advertising is directed exclusively at persons who prescribe or dispense them. It is also permitted to advertise non-prescription medicinal products to the general public. Article 32 deals with unlawful advertising of medicinal products. Further details on the advertising of medicinal products are included in the Ordinance on Advertising of Medicinal Products, which differentiates between advertising to specialists and advertising to the public.

Foodstuffs

Article 12 of the Ordinance on Foodstuffs stipulates a general prohibition against misleading and deceiving consumers in the advertising of foodstuffs. Article 12(3) prohibits the use of specific claims and information in advertising, such as health-related claims (with certain exceptions), deceptive claims about the origin of a foodstuff, etc.

Cannabinoids

Since the individual substances of cannabinoids as well as hemp extracts containing cannabinoids have historically not been consumed to any significant extent in connection with foodstuffs, products constituted in this way are regularly qualified as novel food. Advertising for novel food is subject to the same requirements as set out for other foodstuffs above. Please note that certain products containing cannabidiol (CBD) (only products with less than 1% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are permitted) can also be qualified as utility articles, such as pouches (snus) with CBD or cosmetic articles. For such utility articles, the advertising must not be deceptive, misleading or inaccurate, and the advertising must not contain any health claims (Article 18 of the Federal Statute on Foodstuffs and Utility Articles).

Tobacco

As of 1 October 2024, Switzerland has applied stricter tobacco advertising regulations under the new Tobacco Products Act (TPA). The revised TPA contains several advertising restrictions, as well as restrictions for sales promotions. On 20 June 2025, parliament adopted a new revision with even stricter rules in order to enhance the protection of minors (for further details, see 1.9 Regulatory and Legal Trends).

There are special rules for the placement of products in radio and television broadcasts. According to these rules, product placement is, in principle, permitted and is subject to the rules for sponsorship (see 2.7 Disclosures and 3.4 Sponsor Identification and Branded Content), with the exception of the following special provisions (see Article 21 of the Radio and Television Ordinance).

• Product placements are not permitted in children’s programmes, documentaries and religious programmes, unless the sponsor merely provides goods or services of subordinate value free of charge (in particular as production aids or prizes) and makes no additional payment.
• Product placements must be clearly indicated at the beginning and end of the programme and after each advertising break. A single reference shall suffice for product placements, production aids and prizes of subordinate value of up to CHF5,000. Certain films are exempt from this obligation to indicate the product placement at the beginning and end of a programme.

The most relevant specific rules for products have been mentioned in the preceding sections. Advertising for other products or services must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.