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 2025

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

Tilleke & Gibbins topped the leaderboard with four awards across the region, while Anand & Anand and Kim & Chang emerged as outstanding domestic firms
News of a new addition to Via LA’s Qi wireless charging patent pool, and potential fee increases at the UKIPO were also among the top talking points
The keenly awaited ruling should act as a ‘call to arms’ for a much-needed evolution of UK copyright law, says Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard
Lawyers at Lavoix provide an overview of the UPC’s approach to inventive step and whether the forum is promoting its own approach rather than following the EPO
Andrew Blattman, who helped IPH gain significant ground in Asia and Canada, will leave in the second half of 2026
The court ordering a complainant to rank its arguments in order of potential success and a win for Edwards Lifesciences were among the top developments in recent weeks
Frederick Lee has rejoined Boies Schiller Flexner, bolstering the firm’s capabilities across AI, media, and entertainment
Nirav Desai and Sasha S Rao at Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox explore how companies’ efforts to manage tariffs by altering corporate structures can undermine their ability to assert their patents and recover damages
Monika Żuraw, founder of Żuraw & Partners, discusses why IP should be part of the foundation of a business, and taking on projects that others walk away from
Lawyers say attention will turn to the UK government’s AI consultation after judgment fails to match pre-trial hype
Gift this article