JavaScript disabled. Please enable JavaScript to use My News, My Clippings, My Comments and user settings.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

Nurofen facing fines over misleading claims

Four types of Nurofen painkillers have been found to have misleading packets.

Four types of Nurofen painkillers have been found to have misleading packets. Photo: Supplied

The manufacturer of Nurofen faces millions of dollars in fines but will be allowed to sell painkillers marketed as targeting specific types of pain for another 12 months after a court found they were misleading to customers.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission took Reckitt Benckiser to the Federal Court in March over products in its Nurofen specific-pain range, which are advertised as being specially formulated to treat either back pain, period pain, migraines or tension headaches.

The consumer watchdog argued that in reality, each of the products had exactly the same active ingredient – 342 milligrams of ibuprofen lysine – and that none were any better at treating one type of pain than other products in the range.

The products were advertised as treating specific types of pain, despite having the same ingredients.

The products were advertised as treating specific types of pain, despite having the same ingredients.

Nurofen spokeswoman Montse Pena said the company had not set out to mislead consumers.

"The Nurofen specific-pain range was launched with an intention to help consumers navigate their pain relief options, particularly within the grocery environment where there is no healthcare professional to assist decision making," she said.

"Nurofen has co-operated with the ACCC in relation to these proceedings and will fully comply with the court order made today."

The interim packaging, which carry the same names and the additional information, is currently before the Therapeutic Goods Administration for approval. 

ACCC chairman Rod Sims said the painkillers were being sold at almost double the price of competing products and that the court's decision was a win for consumers.

Mr Sims said there had even been reports of customers suffering from more than one type of pain buying several products from the range, not realising they were buying an identical product.

"It's conceivable someone could exceed the daily dose by looking at a packet of Nurofen Back Pain and taking that in accordance with what they should, and doing the same with Nurofen Tension Headache and thereby overdosing," he said.

The company faces a fine of up to $1.1 million a breach and Mr Sims said the ACCC was examining the judgement to determine how many breaches took place and what penalty it would argue for.

"We think this is a very significant matter and so we'll be arguing for a penalty that sends an appropriate deterrence message," he said.

Sticker needed for disclosure

The court found that Reckitt Benckiser had made misleading claims on the products' packets and on its website and ordered it to remove the products from retail shelves within three months.

The ACCC has agreed to let the company use the same packaging and product names for nine months after that, provided a sticker is attached that discloses that the products are equally effective at treating other types of pain, while it redesigns the products and has them approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration. 

Reckitt Benckiser would not say if it would persevere with the specific pain range after that 12 month period.

Mr Sims said it would be "problematic" if the company did continue selling products marketed as treating a particular type of pain – even with a disclosure – but said it was up to the company to decide what to do next.

The court also ordered the company, which admitted it had engaged in the misleading conduct, to publish corrections on its website and in newspapers, implement a consumer protection compliance program and pay the ACCC's court costs.

 

93 comments so far

  • Withdraw the product and admit that you were very naughty. What a load of crap. How about they repay the money they made charging people double price? Cant see this punishment dissuading any other companies from ripping off the consumer.

    Commenter
    Davey Brunswick
    Date and time
    December 14, 2015, 10:31AM
    • totally agree, this case should act as a deterrent towards similar misleading labeling to other companies, requesting them to simply put a ad, isnt much of a deterrent

      Commenter
      rookie73
      Date and time
      December 14, 2015, 11:56AM
    • "A hearing will be held at later date to decide what fine the company will pay." - try reading the article all the way to the end before commenting next time.

      Commenter
      Chop78
      Location
      Here
      Date and time
      December 14, 2015, 11:59AM
    • Except the simple fact the label will mean that there is a placebo effect, which means if you take one with the correct label it will actually work a little more effectively.

      Commenter
      R
      Location
      Brisbane
      Date and time
      December 14, 2015, 12:47PM
    • They haven't admitted they were naughty- they have further avoided the truth by defending the range saying they "had not set out to mislead consumers" and "with an intention to help consumers navigate their pain relief options". This is where the problem lies- they are refusing to admit that the marketing strategy was based on BS. You can't tell people that a product targets a specific area of the body when that is not true and it's the same bloody thing as in every other one of their "specific pain" range.

      Commenter
      Peter
      Date and time
      December 14, 2015, 12:50PM
    • All the advertisements for pills, supplements, etc are way over the top and not based in reality. We are being fed crap from TV commercials day in and day out, it's not just Nurofen "Migraine".

      Commenter
      Luke R
      Date and time
      December 14, 2015, 12:55PM
    • Even the chemist looked sheepish when I asked why there were such large price disparities between items with exactly the same ingredients. This was 2 years ago, the pharma company should be slapped with a fine and slapped very hard.

      Commenter
      eyeroll
      Location
      Sydney
      Date and time
      December 14, 2015, 1:04PM
    • @Chop78. Try taking your own advice. A fine is not compensation

      Commenter
      Paul D
      Location
      Brissie
      Date and time
      December 15, 2015, 7:18AM
    • I agree. The institutions which should protect the consumer have very little real power because political parties need to protect their sponsors, big business.

      Commenter
      Shedchick
      Location
      Harden
      Date and time
      December 15, 2015, 9:26AM
  • And this is why I've been refusing to buy any form of Nurofen for the past few years. Any company that treats its customers like fools deserves to lose its market share. Glad to see they've finally been brought to account for blatantly ripping off the community.

    Commenter
    clareo
    Date and time
    December 14, 2015, 10:39AM

    More comments

    Make a comment

    You are logged in as [Logout]

    All information entered below may be published.

    Error: Please enter your screen name.

    Error: Your Screen Name must be less than 255 characters.

    Error: Your Location must be less than 255 characters.

    Error: Please enter your comment.

    Error: Your Message must be less than 300 words.

    Post to

    You need to have read and accepted the Conditions of Use.

    Thank you

    Your comment has been submitted for approval.

    Comments are moderated and are generally published if they are on-topic and not abusive.

    HuffPost Australia

    Follow Us





    Featured advertisers

    Special offers

    Credit card, savings and loan rates by Mozo

    Executive Style