Dunnes Stores head Margaret Heffernan ignored complaints by rival supermarket Aldi alleging her company was carrying on a misleading comparative advertising campaign in “flagrant” breach of the relevant laws, the Commercial Court has been told.
Michael McDowell SC, for Aldi, argued that Dunnes acted unlawfully in how it carried out a comparative advertising campaign aimed at trying to stem a “haemorrhage” of customers to Aldi and Lidl in the “highly competitive” supermarket trade.
Michael Howard SC, for Dunnes, said he was concerned such remarks were about “thrashing” Dunnes Stores, but Mr McDowell denied this and said he was entitled to raise matters relating to Dunnes’ “state of mind”.
Mr Justice Brian Cregan said he would grant Mr Howard’s request to be permitted make a brief statement of Dunnes’ response to the claims after Mr McDowell concludes his opening of Aldi’s action
‘Misleading impression’
Aldi alleges Dunnes had on dates unknown and on dates in October and November 2013 put up banners and labels in several stores across the country conveying the “completely misleading impression” that various Dunnes products were cheaper than equivalent Aldi ones.
It alleges Dunnes compared a series of products, including oranges, cosmetic creams, shower gel, tomato ketchup and dog food, that were not comparable on grounds including that the weights or quality differed. Inferior products were compared with Aldi products and objective differences were not drawn to the attention of customers, he said.
Dunnes denies the claims and disputes the meanings Aldi attributes to various banners and shelf labels displayed in its stores.
The case continues.
