Axe Antiperspirants
Allegations: Deceptively marketing that products provide “Anti Marks Protection” when the active ingredient actually causes white marks and yellow stains
October 2019: This case was transferred to federal court. (Case No. 19-cv-2723, E. D. MO.)
July 2019: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Unilever for allegedly falsely marketing that its Axe Anti Marks Protection line of antiperspirants provides protection from and do not produce white marks and yellow stains when, according to plaintiffs, the active ingredient (aluminum zirconium tetrachlorohydrex GLY) causes white marks and yellow stains on clothing. (Crepps et al v. Conopco, Inc. d/b/a Unilever, Case No. 19JE-CC00489, Missouri State Court – Jefferson County)
For more of TINA.org’s coverage of the marketing of deodorants, click here.
Allegations: Deceptively marketing that products provide “Anti Marks Protection” when the active ingredient actually causes white marks and yellow stains
In August 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Unilever for allegedly deceptively using You know when you buy a big bag of chips, and you’re all psyched for a…
Some of the worst ads TINA.org covered this year.
TINA.org files complaint with the FDA and FTC over company’s hair growth claims.
Supplement and serum companies are targeting consumers experiencing hair loss.
Illegal claims that company’s products prevent hair loss also need to go.
Class-action lawsuit asks: Where’s the mint?