Motor Insurance Policy Covers Cross-Border Travel If Specifically Authorized By Valid Permit Under MVA: Supreme Court Petrol Pumps Act As 'Commission Agents' For Mahanagar Gas, Liable To Pay Service Tax Under Business Auxiliary Service: Supreme Court Supreme Court Refuses To Dilute 'Bangalore Water Supply' Ratio, Affirms Worker Protection Remains The Core Of Industrial Disputes Act Order XXII Rule 9(3) CPC | Application Under Section 5 Limitation Act Must Be Filed Separately To Condonate Delay In Setting Aside Abatement: Supreme Court Principle Of Parity | Supreme Court Extends Benefit Of Fixed-Term Sentence To Co-Accused Based On Remission Period Right To Catch Fish Amounts To 'Profit à Prendre' And Is Compulsorily Registrable As A Lease Under Section 17(1)(d) Registration Act: Supreme Court Supreme Court Mandates Adoption Of Guidelines To Inculcate Sensitivity And Compassion In Judicial Processes For Sexual Offences 'Last Seen' Circumstance Is Weak Without Corroboration: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused PSEB | Pre-Regularization Service Must Be Counted As Qualifying Service For Pensionary Benefits: Supreme Court Writ Of Quo Warranto Cannot Be Used For Redress Of Personal Grievances By Unsuccessful Candidates In Selection Process: Supreme Court 'Case Of No Investigation': Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused Citing 'Shoddy' Police Work And Lack Of Forensic Evidence 'Status Quo Cannot Be Vacated Without Appropriate Security': Supreme Court Directs Additional ₹200 Crores Deposit In RAKIA-Matrix Case SARFAESI Act | 'Bank' As Assignee Can Invoke Recovery Measures Even If Debt Was Originally Created By Non-Notified Financial Institution: Supreme Court 'CBI Failed Miserably': Supreme Court Tears Into 'Fabricated' Case, Acquits Bank Manager In 35-Year-Old Corruption Trial Mere Delay In Tax Deposit Cannot Be Equated With Non-Payment: Supreme Court Quashes Penalty On Saudi Arabian Airlines Revisional Power Under Section 56 Karnataka Land Revenue Act Cannot Be Invoked Beyond Three-Year Limitation Period: Supreme Court Prosecution Can’t Use Known Locations To Create 'Discovery' Fiction: Supreme Court Rejects Site Plan As Evidence Irretrievable Breakdown Of Marriage And Long-Term Separation Constitute Valid Grounds For Divorce Under Section 13(1)(ib) HMA: Supreme Court 'Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt Is A Guideline And Not A Fetish': Supreme Court Acquits Man In 2007 Murder Case Over Fragile Circumstantial Evidence Plea Of Juvenility Is A Jurisdictional Fact; High Court Must Recall Final Judgments Under Section 482 CrPC To Remedy Miscarriage Of Justice: Supreme Court SEBI | Professional Clearing Members Have No Statutory Obligation To Verify Credit/Debit Positions Of Individual Clients Of Trading Members: Supreme Court

Promotional Trailers Do Not Transform Into Promises or Agreements Enforceable by Law: Supreme Cour

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India delves into the legal nature of promotional trailers, examining whether they create contractual obligations or constitute unfair trade practices when their content is not included in the final movie.

Facts and Issues: The appellant, Yash Raj Films, used a promotional trailer featuring a song to advertise the movie “Fan.” The respondent, motivated by the trailer, watched the film expecting to see the song included. When the song was not featured in the movie, she filed a consumer complaint alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. The complaint was dismissed at the district level but was subsequently upheld by the State and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions, leading to this appeal.

Contractual Obligations: The Court emphasized that promotional trailers are unilateral communications that do not constitute legal offers or form contracts. Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha stated, “Promotional trailers are unilateral and do not qualify as offers eliciting acceptance, and as such they do not transform into promises, much less agreements enforceable by law.”

Unfair Trade Practice: Regarding the claim of unfair trade practice, the Court found that the promotional trailer did not misleadingly promise the inclusion of the song in the movie. The judgment clarified, “The facts do not support a finding of unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.”

Freedom of Artistic Expression: The judgment also recognized the inherent artistic freedom in film production, noting that decisions on content inclusion are at the discretion of filmmakers and should be considered in evaluating allegations of deceptive marketing practices.

Decision: The Supreme Court overturned the lower courts’ decisions, ruling that the promotional trailer did not create a contractual obligation and its content not appearing in the final film did not amount to an unfair trade practice. The appeal by Yash Raj Films was allowed.

Date of Decision: 22nd April 2024

YASH RAJ FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED vs AFREEN FATIMA ZAIDI & ANR.

 

Latest Legal News