On Wednesday, a Delhi High Court bench heard the lawsuit filed by Honasa Consumer Limited against Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) over an allegedly disparaging sunscreen advertisement. After reviewing the submissions, Justice Amit Bansal found the ad to be disparaging and granted HUL one day to file its response.
Senior counsel Amit Sibal, representing Honasa Consumer Limited — the parent company of Mamaearth — urged the court to order the immediate removal of the HUL advertisement across all platforms, including print, out-of-home (OOH), digital, and social media.
Justice Bansal remarked that, on its face, the advertisement appeared to be disparaging. At the request of HUL’s counsel, the court granted a one-day extension for the company to submit its reply. HUL’s legal team also informed the court that it has filed a similar lawsuit against Honasa Consumer Limited. The court asked for more details about this counter-case and noted that it would be heard separately.
The court remarked that, “A trader is not entitled to denigrate or defame the goods of his competitors while comparing his goods with that of other traders in comparative advertising. The comparing of one’s goods with that of others and establishing the superiority of one’s goods over that of others is permissible.
However, while doing so one is not allowed to make a statement that the goods of others are bad, inferior or undesirable as that would amount to defaming or denigrating the goods of others which is actionable.
Attention of the court has been drawn to a in-vivo testing carried out by the plaintiff of its product, which confirms the fact that plaintiff has an SPF of 50 carried out by a government accredited laboratory. It is stated that the impugned advertisement came up for the first time on 12th April 2025. And has been appearing on print, digital and social media.
Court further said, “Impugned advertisements of the defendants are clearly disparaging and misleading. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by the counsel on behalf of defendant who seeks one day’s accommodation, to take instructions. The evidence is placed reliance on judgment of Division benches.”
The dispute began when Lakmé, a brand under HUL, launched a marketing campaign promoting its SPF 50 sunscreen product, Lakmé Sun Expert. The campaign introduced a dramatized concept called the “SPF Lie Detector Test,” which suggested that certain “online bestsellers” significantly overstated their SPF protection. Though the ad did not name specific brands, it featured two unbranded sunscreen bottles that closely resembled products from Mamaearth’s The Derma Co. and Nykaa’s Dot & Key.
Read More: Sunscreen showdown: Honasa’s Ghazal Alagh takes a jab at HUL-owned Lakmé
According to Lakmé, the campaign was based on in vivo testing — a globally recognized gold standard for evaluating sunscreen efficacy — conducted at an independent, accredited laboratory. The company claimed its product met the advertised SPF 50 standard, while others tested offered protection as low as SPF 20.
Mamaearth responded swiftly. Co-founder Ghazal Alagh publicly accused Lakmé and HUL of copying not only Mamaearth’s sunscreen but also other products, including its vitamin C face wash and onion shampoo. In a now-deleted social media post, Alagh shared side-by-side comparisons and product launch timelines under the headline “OG vs Copy” to back her claims.
“Indian FMCG has lacked strong competition for a long time,” Alagh wrote in another post that remains online. “We take pride in challenging these norms and repeatedly waking up legacy brands.”
In an exclusive statement to Storyboard18, HUL defended its sunscreen product and the associated campaign, asserting that all claims were backed by rigorous testing. “Since 2015, we’ve conducted in vivo SPF testing across our sun care portfolio,” said an HUL spokesperson. The company also alleged that several popular sunscreen brands have been “falsely claiming SPF 50.”
“In the interest of consumers, independent lab testing has revealed that some of these products fall well short of their stated SPF claims,” the spokesperson added. “This misleads consumers and can lead to potential skin concerns like pigmentation, premature aging, and dark spots. Indian consumers deserve sunscreens they can truly trust.”
Read More: Mamaearth-Lakmé faceoff: Skincare brand wars heat up, HUL responds