Thornton & Ross webinar invite: sponsorship not clear at the outset (AUTH/3577/11/21)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case	AUTH/3577/11/21
Company	Thornton & Ross
Complaint about	Advertisement/invitation email for a webinar
Webinar title	“Osteoporosis and fracture prevention”
Main issue	Sponsorship/company involvement not sufficiently prominent at the outset in the email invite
Applicable Code year	2021
Complaint received	4 November 2021
Case completed	13 September 2022
Appeal	No appeal
Breach clauses	5.1, 5.5, 10.9
No breach clauses	3.6
Sanctions	Undertaking received; additional sanctions not stated

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 health professional complained about an emailed invitation advertising a webinar titled “Osteoporosis and fracture prevention”.
The email appeared in the recipient’s inbox as coming from an employee of a named independent organisation, with the subject line “[named independent organisation] Focus - Bone Health Month”.
The email body prominently displayed the independent organisation’s logo and messaging (“[named independent organisation] Launches - Bone Health Month”) and included osteoporosis statistics and statements about prevention and pharmacological management.
The email included a prominent “CLICK HERE TO REGISTER” box for the webinar, but contained no reference at all to Thornton & Ross.
After clicking through, the registration page included the declaration “This webinar has been fully funded by Thornton and Ross and is intended for UK Healthcare Professionals only” in small font towards the bottom left of the page; the independent organisation’s logo remained prominent.
The complainant alleged the event was promotional, that sponsorship was not prominently declared, and that the invitation amounted to disguised promotion.
Thornton & Ross argued sponsorship was clear on the registration page and suggested the complainant’s PDF may have altered the appearance/wording compared with the website version.
The Panel ruled on the email received by the complainant (not what appeared on the independent organisation’s website).

⚖️

⌄

Breach of Clause 10.9 (sponsorship of meetings must be disclosed in all material and sufficiently prominent at the outset).
Breach of Clause 5.5 (sponsored health/disease information must clearly indicate the company’s role; declaration must be sufficiently prominent at the outset).
No breach of Clause 3.6 (disguised promotion not established; complainant did not prove the webinar was promotional).
Breach of Clause 5.1 (failure to maintain high standards).
No appeal.

🔒

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