AUTH/3049/6/18 - Anonymous v Bristol-Myers Squibb

Colour of inverted triangle

  • Received
    11 June 2018
  • Case number
    AUTH/3049/6/18
  • Applicable Code year
    2016
  • Completed
    15 August 2018
  • No breach Clause(s)
  • Breach Clause(s)
  • Sanctions applied
    Undertaking received
  • Additional sanctions
  • Appeal
    No appeal
  • Review
    November 2018 Review

Case Summary

An anonymous, non-contactable complainant complained about the incorrect colour of the inverted triangle used by Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals on its ‘Current products’ website page. The complainant stated that the website had been recently certified with the date of preparation listed as May 2018 and the inverted triangle had been used 6 times and none with the correct black colour.

The detailed response from Bristol-Myers Squibb is given below.

The Panel noted that Bristol-Myers Squibb had immediately removed the webpage when it was informed of the complaint as four triangles on the webpage were dark navy and a further two were dark grey.

The Panel noted Bristol-Myers Squibb’s submission that the website in question was a publicly visible, non-promotional, UK corporate website. The Panel considered that the complainant had not established that the website was promotional and required the black inverted triangle symbol thus no breach of the Code was ruled.

The Panel noted that contrary to Bristol-Myers Squibb’s view, it was not only promotional material that required the inclusion of a black triangle. The Panel noted that in addition, the inverted black triangle symbol needed to be included on material which related to a medicine which was subject to additional monitoring and which was intended for a patient taking that medicine.

The webpage in question included the medicine name and links to the electronic Medicines Compendium to enable the visitor to view the relevant summary of product characteristics (SPC) or patient information leaflet (PIL). In the Panel’s view, the inverted black triangle was a well-known and established symbol. Its appropriate use was an important part of medicines regulation. Thus, in the Panel’s view failure to publish the triangle in the correct colour was, at the very least, inappropriate and might potentially cause confusion. This was a serious matter. The Panel ruled that high standards had not been maintained in breach of the Code.