Quackbase!

Response number: 56

Responder: ASASA

Date of response: Dec. 1, 2009

Type of response: Ruling

The Solal claims are not substantiated. The complaint was upheld and the claims ordered to be withdrawn.

Claims dealt with in this response

• Claim no 31: Solal Technologies Sugar has harmful effects made on 2009-12-01 - Hyperbole

Description

ASASA rules that the claims by Solal are unsubstantiated.

Solal did not address the complaint but tried to dismiss the complaint on several legal technicalities:
• SASA has no right to lodge complaint as they’re not a consumer.
• SASA did not identify which part of the Code was violated by Solal
• Basis of SASA’s complaint is factually incorrect
• The Directorate‟s refusal to rule on the points in limine first
The ASA Directorate rejected all these arguments and the complaint was upheld.

The ruling is here:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4290627/SOLAL/ASARuling-NaturallySweet1Dec2009.pdf