Decisions of Administrative or Quasi-Judicial Agencies - Decisions -False,Untrue and Misleading Advertisement-2007

1. Far EasTone Telecommunications Co., Ltd. violated Articles 21 and 24 of the Fair Trade Law by issuing untrue news release and comparison advertisement of telecommunications plans
2. Yang, Shuang Mao of Potato Cafe violated the Fair Trade Law by placing false Potato Cafe franchising advertisement
3. Jing-Shen International Enterprise Co., Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law by placing false online advertisement to sell AFC products
4. All Chinese Internet Inc. violated Articles 19(v) and 21(1), applied mutatis mutandis to 21(3), of the Fair Trade Law by placing false online advertisement and replicating another's business database
5. Hitachi Sales Corporation of Taiwan violated Article 21(1) of the Fair Trade Law by placing untrue online advertisement to sell washing machines
6. Ms. Chuang, Yun-Ni and Tung-Hao Corporation violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law by placing untrue sales information on Yahoo's auction site and the representations were false, untrue and misleading
7. Poya-Living-Mart Co. Ltd. violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law by publishing false, untrue and misleading sales messages about the contents of the products in the advertisement catalog
8. Han-Shen Development Co. Ltd. violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law by publishing untrue construction advertisement on "Heirloom Castle"
9. Bionet Corp. violated the Fair Trade Law by publishing false advertisements
10. Chu Ho Fa Construction Corporation violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law by publishing an untrue pre-sale housing advertisement on "Li Ching Century Governor."
11. Pacific Rehouse Co., Ltd., three other real estates agencies and Giga House were complained for violating the Fair Trade Law by failing to file a merger report and concerted application the FTC regarding, respectively, their intentions to merger and form a concerted action, publishing an untrue advertisement and conducting a joint sale
12. Taiwan Secom Co., Ltd. violated Article 21(3) and, mutatis mutandis, Article 21(1) of the Fair Trade Law by publishing an untrue advertisement
13. Hui Kang Co. Ltd. violated Article 21 of the Fair Trade Law by publishing an untrue advertisement on "with every NT$ 200 of purchases, the customer gets cash vouchers to the value of NT$ 200 for free."
14. Asia Pacific Telecom Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law by publishing Wonder4+Honey99 charge package commercial stating "No charge for intra-net of Asia Pacific Telecom Ltd.", "cheapest charge for outside Asia Pacific Telecom Ltd. network", and "Free charge for intra-network and the lowest cost for inter-networks is NT$3.6/min" etc
15. Far Eastone Telecommunications Co. Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law by advertising "Far Eastone Big Twin Networks Chats 990" charge plan commercial on broadcasts, televisions, newspapers and other media, contending "free calls amongst intra-network", "intra-network visual calls are also free", "inter-network calls and landlines are half price", and "Far Eastone and KG Telecom are the biggest network in this country"
16. Advertisement by Dong-Sheng Construction Co. Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law for false advertisement on its sales project of "Upon Dong-Sheng Milan Maple"
17. Animation Technologies Inc. violated the Fair Trade Law by publishing false information of obtaining patent, via on the company's websiteKey words: television card, patent, false advertisement
18. Yi-Xiang Construction Co. Ltd. violated the Fair Trade Law for false presale real estate property advertisement of its "Jia-Xing Park" construction project contracts

[Browse by APEC Member Economies] [Browse by Subject Categories] [Home]