Argentina: Comparative advertising in the new Civil and Commercial Code

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Argentina: Comparative advertising in the new Civil and Commercial Code

Several rules have been applied to comparative advertising, for example competition law rules which regulate unfair competition (Section 159 of the Argentine Criminal Code, Section 10 bis of the Paris Convention), and trade mark-related rules.

Now, with the approval of the new Civil and Commercial Argentine Code, comparative advertising, which had been dealt with basically from the point of view of the unfair competition law or the trade mark law, is also dealt with, in the new Code, from the perspective of the consumer law. In this regard, the code establishes when comparative advertising is prohibited.

Section 1101 of the new Code makes reference to the different types of advertising that are prohibited, and specifically subsection b) refers to the cases in which comparative advertising is prohibited. This section states:

Advertising. Advertising shall be banned if:

...

b) it makes comparisons between goods or services, when the nature of said comparisons is such that they lead the consumer to error;

Therefore, by virtue of this section, the prohibited comparative advertising is that which is not based on the truth and, consequently, leads the consumer into error. It is, for example, comparative advertising based on elements or parameters that lack objectivity.

It should be noted that the prohibition established is intended to protect the consumer, as the Code effects such protection when regulating consumption agreements and, thus, other principles or regulations shall become applicable to the conflicts that comparative advertising might cause among competitors.


Daniel R Zuccherino


Obligado & CiaParaguay 610, 17th FloorC1057AAH, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaTel: +54 11 4114 1100Fax: +54 11 4311 5675admin@obligado.com.arwww.obligado.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

News of Dolby suing Snap over AV1 and HEVC patents and SCOTUS offering guidance on the liability of internet service providers were also among the top talking points
Arrival of Caitlin Heard will bolster the soon-to-be-created Ashurst Perkins Coie’s IP presence in the capital
AI, cybersecurity and data practice group will provide clients with legal guidance around AI alongside a 'deep technical foundation’ in IP
Lawyers at Vondst and Biopatents say a ruling concerning the protected status of trade secrets could see the UPC flooded with requests to prevent access to confidential information
Sharad Vadehra of Kan & Krishme discusses why older IP firms still have an edge over up-and-coming boutiques and how the firm is using AI to provide quick and cost-effective service
Lawyers at Appleyard Lees share how they picked apart a plant breeder’s infringement claims concerning the ‘Tango’ mandarin
A further decision on long-arm status, and a new hire for Pentarc in Germany from Taylor Wessing were also among top developments
The US decision marks a rare grant of a request under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act in a patent case
Stobbs has applied to strike out a contempt of court application filed against the firm and two of its lawyers
With trademark volumes surging, trademark teams need to think beyond traditional clearance searches, towards a continuous, intelligence-led workflow, says Meghan Medeiros of Corsearch
Gift this article