ALK-Abelló: unsolicited promotional emails and excessive launch mailings for Grazax (AUTH/1981/3/07)

📅 8 March 2026 | 🖉 Dr Anzal Qurbain
📊

Key facts

Case numberAUTH/1981/3/07
ComplainantConsultant in respiratory medicine
CompanyALK-Abelló (UK) Limited
ProductGrazax (SQ-T oral lyophilisate)
Main issueUnsolicited promotional emails; launch-period promotional mailing limit
Complaint received27 March 2007
Case completed3 July 2007
Applicable Code year2006
Breach clausesClause 9.9; Clause 12.2
No breachClause 9.1
AppealNo appeal
SanctionUndertaking received

Download the full case report (PDF)


Reviewed by Dr Anzal Qurbain (FFPM) — ABPI Final Signatory

🤖

Got a question about this case?

Ask one of our 13 specialist ABPI advisors — instant answers, 24/7.

Ask AskAnzal AI
📋

What happened

  • A consultant in respiratory medicine complained about receiving several unsolicited emails from ALK-Abelló (UK) Limited about Grazax (SQ-T oral lyophilisate), plus an “absolute barrage” of information via conventional channels.
  • ALK-Abelló obtained the consultant’s email address via a third-party specialist database/agency which stated it was used by various organisations including pharmaceutical companies, but did not state how pharma companies would use the data.
  • The agency told ALK-Abelló that consultants could choose to submit an email address so “users” could contact them; ALK-Abelló relied on the agency’s written assurance that physicians had permission to be contacted by email.
  • ALK-Abelló sent multiple communications around the January 2007 launch of Grazax, including an initial mailing (Dear Dr letter + SPC) and three further promotional mailings, plus meeting invitations/updates.
  • The Panel reviewed whether the company had (a) explicit consent to send promotional material by email and (b) complied with the launch-period limit on promotional mailings.
⚖️

Outcome

  • Breach of Clause 9.9 (unsolicited promotional email without explicit consent).
  • Breach of Clause 12.2 (exceeded the permitted number of promotional mailings in the first six months post-launch).
  • No breach of Clause 9.1 (high standards) in the circumstances.
  • No appeal.
🔒

Unlock the full case analysis

Members get the complete breakdown — Clauses, Sanction, Signatory Lens, Audit checklist, and 3 Key Questions.

Best value
£249/year
Annual — save £99
or
£29/mo
Monthly
Join Now — Instant Access

📰 Weekly PMCPA Case Breakdown

One real case. One key lesson. Every week — free.

Subscribe Free