06 May 2015 Battle of the lite beers: Amstel fights back and wins
Brandhouse has won its appeal against the ruling made earlier this year by the ASA which initially directed it to withdraw the Amstel Lite cans and the shrink wrap from the market within three months of the ASA’s decision.
“We are very pleased that the Advertising Industry Tribunal (AIT) upheld our appeal in respect of the Amstel Lite can, finding that ‘the Castle Lite can is distinctive enough for a reasonable consumer to differentiate the products'”, says Michael Mabasa, the corporate relations director at Brandhouse.
“This ruling is good news for our consumers because the current silver and green Amstel Lite can design and the use of the word ‘LITE’ will NOT be amended nor withdrawn from the market. The AIT’s ruling has effectively validated our designs and as a result, averted any potential confusion in the minds of our consumers”, says Mabasa.
The AIT ruling comes at the back of SA Breweries (SAB) complaint last year against Brandhouse for allegedly copying a combination of colours in silver and green packaging and the use of word ‘LITE’ in beer products.
All this served to “render the products indistinguishable in trade,” SAB said at the time. In the US and Europe, Amstel’s light beer is branded “Amstel Light” and packaged in brown, red and gold.
The Directorate, the first level of the ASA, made a ruling on February 6, 2015, in favour of SAB and directed Brandhouse to withdraw the Amstel Lite cans and the shrink wrap from the market within three months of the ASA’s decision.
Brandhouse immediately appealed the Directorate’s ruling to the AIT and concurrently requested the ASA to suspend the Directorate’s ruling. The ASA found that it did not have jurisdiction to suspend the Directorate’s ruling and Brandhouse lodged an urgent application to the Pretoria High Court which ruled in Brandhouse’ favour and the Directorate’s ruling was suspended pending the determination of the appeal by the AIT.
Brandhouse argued to the court that if it were to adhere to the ruling and withdraw the packaging before the appeal it would suffer irreparable harm. It put the estimated cost of changing the packaging at R100m, reports the Pretoria News.
Shrink-wrap must change
On the Amstel Lite shrink wrap, the AIT held that “the similarity between [the Amstel Lite and Castle Lite shrink wraps] creates the likelihood of confusion”.
“The ASA ruling simply calls for more differentiation on the plastic shrink-wrap to avoid any potential confusion. We accept this ruling and will be making some design changes to the Amstel Lite shrink wrap to ensure it’s even more distinct,” says Mabasa.
SAB has yet to issue comment.
Related reading:
ASA rules Amstel Lite packaging ‘too similar’ to Castle Lite