Last Updated February 20, 2019

Law and Practice

Contributed By Jones Day

Authors



Jones Day assists with all facets of clients' marketing, promotion, and advertising efforts by devising marketing strategies, developing packaging and labelling, obtaining internal and governmental approvals and implementing compliant advertising campaigns, including print, radio and television advertising, website development and social media platforms. The firm's Life Sciences team helps clients to preserve their advertising position and challenge infringing competitors. Its lawyers provide assistance with pharmaceutical, medical device and biological regulations, including counselling and representation on diverse issues such as product development, product clearance and approval, clinical trials, biosafety, licensing agreements, facility and establishment registration, product listing, government inspections, product and ingredient notifications, recalls, corrective actions, regulatory and due diligence projects, and audits and compliance with good manufacturing practices and the quality systems regulation. The team has successfully defended clients against FDA enforcement actions including warning letters, seizures, product recalls, inspections, civil monetary penalties, adverse agency determinations, consent decrees and corporate integrity agreements. The views and opinions set forth herein are the personal views or opinions of the author; they do not necessarily reflect views or opinions of the law firm with which [he or she] is associated.

Comparative advertising for medicines is not prohibited but it is restricted by Japanese law and self-regulatory codes. The major restrictions are as follows:

According to the Commentary of Article 9 of the Standards, a pharmaceutical company’s comparative advertising must only feature its own products and the advertising must specify the name of those products. Comparisons with competitors’ products are prohibited. In addition, when a pharmaceutical company compares two of its own products, the company must ensure that it provides a sufficient explanation of the products.

Further, the JPMA Promotion Code stipulates that comparative advertising “shall be based on scientific data and, in principle, shall be made using generic names.”

Finally, the Consumer Affairs Agency has issued general guidelines for comparative advertising. These guidelines provide that a comparative advertisement shall be considered a Misleading Representation prohibited under the UPMRA if:

  • it makes comparisons using unproved or unprovable facts;
  • it emphasises unimportant matters as if they were important or makes comparisons based on an unfair selection of products; or
  • it merely slanders or defames competitors’ products.
Jones Day

Kamiyacho Prime Place
1-17, Toranomon 4-chome
Minato-ku
Tokyo 105-0001
Japan

+81 334333939

+81 354012725

www.jonesday.com/tokyo/

Authors



Jones Day assists with all facets of clients' marketing, promotion, and advertising efforts by devising marketing strategies, developing packaging and labelling, obtaining internal and governmental approvals and implementing compliant advertising campaigns, including print, radio and television advertising, website development and social media platforms. The firm's Life Sciences team helps clients to preserve their advertising position and challenge infringing competitors. Its lawyers provide assistance with pharmaceutical, medical device and biological regulations, including counselling and representation on diverse issues such as product development, product clearance and approval, clinical trials, biosafety, licensing agreements, facility and establishment registration, product listing, government inspections, product and ingredient notifications, recalls, corrective actions, regulatory and due diligence projects, and audits and compliance with good manufacturing practices and the quality systems regulation. The team has successfully defended clients against FDA enforcement actions including warning letters, seizures, product recalls, inspections, civil monetary penalties, adverse agency determinations, consent decrees and corporate integrity agreements. The views and opinions set forth herein are the personal views or opinions of the author; they do not necessarily reflect views or opinions of the law firm with which [he or she] is associated.

{{searchBoxHeader}}

Select Topic(s)

loading ...
{{topic.title}}

Please select at least one chapter and one topic to use the compare functionality.