AUTH/3805/7/23: ViiV dating-app Apretude advert seen in UK – Appeal Board found out of scope, no breach

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/3805/7/23
Company	ViiV Healthcare UK Ltd
Complainant	Anonymous, non-contactable; described themselves as a member of the public/media
Medicine	Apretude (cabotegravir)
Channel	In-app advertising on a dating app
Core allegation	Alleged promotion of Apretude to the public in the UK; lack of UK certification; geo-targeting failure
Key factual point	US-only geo-restrictions reportedly failed due to vendor error; ads visible to ex-US users for 27–29 July 2023
Complaint received	29 July 2023
Case completed	13 February 2025
Applicable Code	2021
Final outcome	No breach (Clause 5.1 breach overturned on appeal)
Appeal	Appeal by the respondent; successful

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

📋

⌄

An anonymous, non-contactable complainant (member of the public/media) said they saw an in-app advert for Apretude (cabotegravir) while using a gay dating app in the UK.
At the time, Apretude was licensed in the USA for HIV-1 PrEP, and not licensed in the UK.
The complainant alleged this was promotion of a prescription medicine (and/or an unapproved medicine) to the public and said the advert/website did not appear certified for a UK audience; they suggested it should have been geo-targeted to US users only.
ViiV said the campaign was commissioned by ViiV US via a media agency as US-only in-app advertising; geo-restrictions fell away mid-campaign due to a vendor error by the app, making some ads visible to ex-US users.
ViiV said the affected visibility lasted three days (27–29 July 2023) and that all advertising on the app was suspended on 1 August 2023 (the day ViiV UK received the complaint).
The Panel first decided the ad was in scope of the Code, partly because the creative mimicked a chat and showed a fictitious match “2 miles away”, giving the impression it was targeted to the user in the UK.
The Panel initially ruled a breach of Clause 5.1 (high standards), but ViiV appealed.
The Appeal Board focused on Clause 1.2 and concluded the advert did not make “specific reference to the availability or use of the medicine in the UK”, so it was out of scope and therefore no breach.

⚖️

⌄

📖

⌄

Clause 5.1 – Requirement to maintain high standards at all times
Clause 8.3 – Requirement to certify non-promotional material
Clause 26.1 – Requirement not to advertise prescription only medicines to the public
Clause 26.2 – Requirement that information about prescription only medicines which is made available to the public must be factual, balanced, must not raise unfounded hopes of successful treatment or encourage the public to ask their health professional to prescribe a specific prescription only medicine.

🔒

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