A recent advertisement by Lakme, a brand owned by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL), has sparked controversy in the Indian market. The ad, which aired on April 12, 2025, claims that an “online bestseller” sunscreen is making false claims about its Sun Protection Factor (SPF). The advertisement, dubbed the “SPF Lie Detector Test,” suggests that the competing product, which is implied to be Derma Co’s sunscreen, has a lower SPF than advertised. Specifically, the ad claims that the product says it has SPF 50 but actually provides only SPF 20.
Honasa Consumer Limited, the company behind Derma Co, has taken umbrage with HUL’s campaign, alleging that it is a “classic hit and run” tactic aimed at discrediting their product. Honasa’s counsel argued that HUL’s claims are baseless and misleading, implying that using their sunscreen could lead to skin pigmentation without providing any evidence to support this assertion. According to Honasa, HUL’s advertisement is an attempt to falsely imply that their sunscreen is ineffective and makes misleading claims.
In response to HUL’s campaign, Honasa launched its own advertisements to counter the claims made by Lakme. However, HUL has since filed a lawsuit against Honasa in the Bombay High Court, seeking to stop the company from airing its counter-ads. The lawsuit is the latest development in the escalating feud between the two companies, with each side accusing the other of making misleading claims. The controversy highlights the intense competition in the Indian sunscreen market and the importance of truthful advertising. As the case unfolds, it will be interesting to see how the court rules on the matter and what implications this will have for the advertising practices of companies in the industry.
The dispute between HUL and Honasa has significant implications for the sunscreen industry in India, where consumers are becoming increasingly conscious of the importance of sun protection. With the growing demand for sunscreen products, companies are under pressure to differentiate themselves and make compelling claims about their products. However, this must be balanced with the need for truthful advertising, and companies must be careful not to make misleading claims that could harm consumers or damage their competitors’ reputation. Ultimately, the outcome of this case will depend on the evidence presented and the court’s interpretation of the advertising laws in India.