Delhi High Court orders Bombay Shaving Company to remove razor ad

MUMBAI: The razor-sharp ad battle between Gillette India and Bombay Shaving Company has now cut into courtroom territory and the Court wants that part taken out. The Delhi High Court has directed Bombay Shaving Company (BSC) to take down its Switch4 razor advertisement from channels under its control after objecting to its use of a fictional courtroom setting, judge and legal proceedings as part of the campaign.

The dispute between BSC and Gillette India centres on the advertisement, which presents the contest as “Bombay Shaving Company versus Uncle Razor” and uses a courtroom-style treatment to make its creative point.

During Wednesday’s hearing, Justice Jyoti Singh questioned the decision to place a razor advertisement in a court setting. When BSC’s counsel argued that the treatment was intended to be humorous and was not meant to mock the Court, the judge described the depiction as an “outright mockery”.

The Court’s concern extended beyond the competing razor products and the alleged resemblance between them. As the advertisement’s storyboard was examined, Justice Singh repeatedly focused on the fictionalised courtroom proceedings and the manner in which the legal setting was being used for the campaign.

The Court subsequently directed BSC to remove the courtroom portions of the advertisement. The company also agreed to take down the impugned version from platforms under its control and share a revised advertisement with Gillette before the next hearing.

The product itself remains at the heart of the wider advertising dispute. BSC’s counsel proposed altering the appearance of the razor shown in the campaign and adding a disclaimer stating that the blade was compatible with products from multiple brands.

Gillette’s counsel, however, argued that simply changing the razor’s appearance would not address its concerns because the advertisement remained centred on its product.

Justice Singh observed that the matter was “more than merely a reference to a competitor”, while the Court’s separate concern remained the use of a fictional court proceeding as an advertising device.

The order puts a temporary brake on one element of BSC’s creative treatment, leaving the company to rework the advertisement before the next stage of the proceedings. For an ad that was designed to put the competition on trial, the courtroom has now delivered its own verdict on the setting: cut it from the script.