Search results : 1510

On 19 May 2006, the Red-Green Government in Norway informed Parliament that the prohibition on political and religious advertising on TV, as laid down in the Broadcasting Act, will be upheld. The decision reversed the former Government’s proposal to repeal the ban. Last summer, the previous Government in Norway circulated for public review a proposal to allow political and religious advertising on TV except for a period of four weeks before and on Election Day where a total ban should apply. No particular regulation was proposed on such advertising outside this period, even though limitations on...

The question as to the admissibility of advertising for private betting agencies in Germany is still not completely resolved. Even after the decision handed down by the Federal Constitutional Court (see IRIS 2006-6: 8), court rulings on the consequences that flow from the decision still differ. The regional court of Hamburg (LG Hamburg), for instance, issued an injunction on 14 June 2006 preventing the broadcasting company RTL from continuing to broadcast advertisements for a private sports betting agency. This was followed on 19 June 2006 by a decision of the first regional court of Munich (LG...

Political parties and presidential candidates can place paid political advertisements on radio and television during the campaign period for parliamentary and presidential elections respectively. The amending law L.85(I)2006 of the Law on Radio and Television Stations of 1998, published in the official Gazette on 20 April 2006 provides that political advertising is allowed during the 40 days preceding the elections and must stop 55 hours before the start of voting. Their total duration can not exceed 100 minutes, which is limited to 30 minutes in the case of independent candidates to the parliament....

The Federal Communications Commission (BKS) established in May 2003 that ORF had on several occasions during the television programme “Starmania” violated the ORF law on advertising limitations (see IRIS 2003-7: 6). With regard to the appeal of ORF against this decision, the Administrative Court ruled as follows: 1. The BKS had established that ORF had repeatedly shown crisp packages, mineral water bottles, a one metre high tube as well as plasma television screens, which all clearly bore a brand name. It considered that this constituted a violation of the ban on product placement in that such...

Advocate General Léger has argued in his closing submissions that the claim lodged by Germany against the Directive on advertising and sponsorship of tobacco products in media other than television (2003/33/EC) should be dismissed (Case C-380/03) (see IRIS 2005-7: 10). Germany had already challenged a previous, similarly entitled Directive of 6 July 1998 (98/43/EC) in the ECJ on the grounds that its legal basis was incorrect (Case C-367/98) and had succeeded in having it completely annulled. In September 2003 Germany made a fresh application for annulment of the follow-up Tobacco Advertising Directive...