Anonymous v Meda: Promotion of Rhinolast (AUTH/2401/4/11) — No breach (outwith scope of the Code) | PMCPA Case

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/2401/4/11
Parties	Anonymous v Meda
Product	Rhinolast
Issue	Promotion of Rhinolast
Complaint received	15 April 2011
Completed	12 May 2011
Outcome	No breach; outwith the scope of the Code
Clauses cited	No breach, outwith the scope of the Code
Sanctions	None stated
Case report	No case report (outwith scope)
Source	https://www.pmcpa.org.uk/cases/completed-cases/auth2401411-anonymous-v-meda

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

🎬 Expert Video Walkthrough

🎬

Video walkthrough — coming for members

Subscribe now and get expert video analysis for every case as we publish them.

Subscribe — from £299/yr

📋

⌄

A complaint was made by an anonymous complainant about the promotion of Rhinolast by Meda.
The PMCPA determined the matter was outwith the scope of the ABPI Code of Practice.

⚖️

⌄

🔒

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

Best value

£249/year

Annual — save £99

£29/mo

Monthly

Join Now — Instant Access

⭐ Business Intelligence Access

See the full compliance picture for every pharma company

291 Company Intelligence Reports — breach patterns, appeal history, industry ranking, PDF export.

Request Access →