ViiV Healthcare voluntary admission: Triumeq journal advertising exceeded 2-page limit (AUTH/2753/3/15)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/2753/3/15
Company	ViiV Healthcare UK Ltd
Product	Triumeq (dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine)
Medium	Printed journal advertising (double-page spread + belly band wrapper)
Publication	International Journal of STD and Aids (February 2015 issue)
Issue	Exceeded maximum of two pages of advertising for a particular product in one journal issue
Applicable Code year	2014
Breach clauses	Clause 6.3
Complaint received	20 March 2015
Case completed	13 April 2015
Appeal	No appeal
Sanctions	Undertaking received
Stated cause	Scheduling/administration error involving publisher systems following knock-on changes from artwork delays; publisher accepted responsibility, company accepted overall responsibility

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

📋

⌄

ViiV Healthcare UK voluntarily admitted that the February 2015 printed edition of the International Journal of STD and Aids contained a double-page Triumeq (dolutegravir/abacavir/lamivudine) advertisement plus a Triumeq belly band wrapper around the outside of the journal.
This meant the advertising for a single product in one journal issue exceeded the Code limit (two pages maximum).
The issue was identified by ViiV’s media-buying agency on 12 March 2015; the online issue was not affected (the belly band was print-only).
ViiV stated the publisher took full responsibility for a scheduling/administration error; ViiV also accepted it had overall responsibility for promotional activity and for actions of third parties acting on its behalf.
ViiV provided approval certificates for both advertisements and supplied the original advertising schedule and related correspondence.

⚖️

⌄

Breach ruled: Yes.
The Panel ruled the advertising placement was within the scope of the Code and that the inclusion of a double-page spread plus a belly band in the same issue was a clear breach.
No appeal.
Sanction recorded: Undertaking received.

🔒

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