{"id":14192,"date":"2011-10-13T23:30:00","date_gmt":"2011-10-13T21:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/sentenza-del-consiglio-di-stato-il-pieghevole-non-e-messaggio-promozionale\/"},"modified":"2011-10-13T23:30:00","modified_gmt":"2011-10-13T21:30:00","slug":"sentenza-del-consiglio-di-stato-il-pieghevole-non-e-messaggio-promozionale","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/sentenza-del-consiglio-di-stato-il-pieghevole-non-e-messaggio-promozionale\/","title":{"rendered":"Judgment of the Council of State: the leaflet is not a promotional message"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify\"><span style=\"font-family: &quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color: black\"><font size=\"3\"><em>The Council of State confirmed the sentence of the Lazio Regional Administrative Court and rejected the Antitrust appeal on the report of a doctor to whom an Isf had shown a leaflet on a treatment for osteoarthritis, considering it misleading advertising and forbidding its further dissemination. With sentence no. 5297\/2011, the Council of State considered that, in the specific case, it was reasonable to consider that the message in question was not preordained for dissemination to the general public, in order to promote the sale of the product, but rather assumed an informative purpose for targeted, as such outside the scope of the provisions concerning unfair commercial practices.<\/p>\n<p><\/em><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify\"><strong><em style=\"mso-bidi-font-style: normal\"><span style=\"font-family: &quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color: black; font-size: 9pt; font-weight: normal; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold\">(Italy today Pag.43 \u2013 10\/13\/2011)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <img","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Il Consiglio di Stato ha confermato la sentenza del Tar del Lazio e rigettato&nbsp;il ricorso dell&#8217;Antitrust sulla segnalazione di un medico cui un&nbsp;Isf aveva mostrato un pieghevole su un trattamento per l&#8217;osteoartrosi, ritenendola pubblicit&agrave; ingannevole e&nbsp;vietandone la sua ulteriore diffusione. Con la&nbsp;sentenza n. 5297\/2011 il Consiglio di Stato ha ritenuto che, nel caso specifico, fosse &hellip;<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":9846,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[90],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14192","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-fedaiisf-archivio-storico"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14192","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14192"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14192\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9846"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14192"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14192"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fedaiisf.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14192"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}