AUTH/3830/9/23: Complainant v Daiichi Sankyo UK — event sponsorship declaration (No breach)

📊

Key facts

⌄

Case number	AUTH/3830/9/23
Company	Daiichi Sankyo UK Ltd
Complainant	Anonymous, contactable complainant
Issue	Alleged lack of sponsorship declaration on event website home page and registration page
Applicable Code year	2021
Clauses considered	Clause 2; Clause 5.1; Clause 10.9
Panel decision	No breach of Clause 10.9, 5.1, or 2
Sanctions	None
Complaint received	26 September 2023
Case completed	23 December 2024
Appeal	No appeal
Event sponsorship described by company	Stand and two symposia (event organised by a media company; multi-sponsor event)

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, contactable complainant alleged Daiichi Sankyo UK funded/sponsored a named event but the sponsorship statement was not provided on the event home page and registration page.
The complaint alleged transparency was missing “at point of registration and event introduction” and cited Clauses 10.9, 5.1 and 2.
Daiichi Sankyo UK said it sponsored the event via a stand and two symposia, and that the event was organised by a media company and sponsored by many organisations.
Daiichi Sankyo UK provided screenshots showing: (a) a “Sponsors” tab on the homepage, (b) a sponsorship disclaimer on the homepage with a link to the sponsor list, and (c) registration-page text stating the event was supported by educational grants and that sponsor/partner lists were available on the website.
The Panel reviewed the screenshots and assessed the “immediate and overall impression” and whether sponsorship was clear “at the outset” (including during registration).

⚖️

⌄

🔒

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