Go back to News
NEWS
GA_P represents INTERPORC, PROVACUNO, INTEROVIC, ASICI, AVIANZA and INTERCUN in the lawsuit against Foods for Tomorrow
4 of June, 2024
The interprofessional organisations INTERPORC, PROVACUNO, INTEROVIC, ASICI, AVIANZA and INTERCUN, represented by Gómez-Acebo & Pombo, have partially won the lawsuit brought against Foods for Tomorrow (Heüra) for greenwashing advertising.
The judgment, handed down on 23 April 2024, declares that Heüra has committed acts of unfair competition on the grounds that its advertising consisting of statements relating to livestock and meat products is misleading, denigratory and an unlawful comparison.
What is relevant in this judgment is the conviction of Heüra, which states that the advertising that has been declared unlawful was carried out through an intense campaign on the social network Instagram, as well as the advertising banner in Toledo Street in Madrid (A hamburger pollutes more than your car). Although the banner was removed, the plaintiff has proved in its lawsuit how the lawsuit has even ‘profited’ from the previous injunction procedure, with the publication of photographs and videos. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that the defendant’s conduct will continue or that the misleading, denigrating and unlawfully comparative acts will remain in the consumer’s memory.
The GA_P team was formed by José Luis Palma, counsel for Public and Regulated Sectors, and Mónica Esteve and Mercedes Corbal, respectively counsel and associate for Industrial and Intellectual Property.
Congratulations to all of them!
The judgment, handed down on 23 April 2024, declares that Heüra has committed acts of unfair competition on the grounds that its advertising consisting of statements relating to livestock and meat products is misleading, denigratory and an unlawful comparison.
What is relevant in this judgment is the conviction of Heüra, which states that the advertising that has been declared unlawful was carried out through an intense campaign on the social network Instagram, as well as the advertising banner in Toledo Street in Madrid (A hamburger pollutes more than your car). Although the banner was removed, the plaintiff has proved in its lawsuit how the lawsuit has even ‘profited’ from the previous injunction procedure, with the publication of photographs and videos. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that the defendant’s conduct will continue or that the misleading, denigrating and unlawfully comparative acts will remain in the consumer’s memory.
The GA_P team was formed by José Luis Palma, counsel for Public and Regulated Sectors, and Mónica Esteve and Mercedes Corbal, respectively counsel and associate for Industrial and Intellectual Property.
Congratulations to all of them!
Press contact
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
03 Mar, 2026 
PUBLICATION
03 Mar, 2026
Legal doctrine of the UPC’s Court of Appeal on the patent invalidity defence: is the way in which the ‘long arm’ is applied compatible with the UPC's own Rules of Procedure?
The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court has ruled that a patent invalidity defence cannot be raised before the Unified Patent Court, with only a counterclaim being possible. This calls into question the way in which the ‘long arm’ is being applied with regard to European patents validated in States that are not party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), whether or not they are members of the European Union, since no counterclaim for revocation or plea of invalidity as a defence can be filed or raised with regard to such patents. This raises significant doubts about the compatibility of how the ‘long arm’ is applied in the Unified Patent Court system, given its own Rules of Procedure.
03 Mar, 2026 
PUBLICATION
26 Feb, 2026
A restructuring plan sanctioned in England and Wales that modifies debt subject to German law has no effect in Germany
Recognition of UK restructuring plans remains a contentious issue in the European Union. This decision by the Frankfurt am Main Regional Court is controversial, but it raises questions about the consequences of the application of the rule in Gibbs by the courts of England and Wales in this context.
26 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
26 Feb, 2026
Pharma & Healthcare No. 47
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.
26 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
23 Feb, 2026
Irregularities in public sector staffing. Jurisdiction and/or substantive law
When a serious irregularity is found in administrative contracts owing to their employment character, jurisdiction lies with the employment branch of the court system. However, if the administrative route is not outside the scope of the law, jurisdiction lies with the judicial review branch of the court system.
23 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
17 Feb, 2026
Squeeze-out of minority shareholders following successful mandatory takeover bid: rebuttable presumption of fair consideration
The Court of Justice of the European Union (Fifth Chamber), in its judgment of 27 November 2025 (Case C-567/24, Svema Trade), concerning the equitable price in a squeeze-out requiring minority shareholders to sell their shares to an offeror who, following a mandatory takeover bid, has acquired more than 90% of the capital carrying voting rights in the company subject of the takeover bid, states that the presumption that the price offered in the bid, in the context of such a squeeze-out of holders of securities, is equitable is rebuttable.
17 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
13 Feb, 2026
Senior management, membership of the board of directors and insolvency proceedings: single association theory yes, but also employer-employee relationship
Despite classifying the association as a commercial relationship and not an employment relationship, compensation amounts for termination of contract are allowed if they match those accepted by the insolvency practitioners, just as remuneration amounts are allowed if said practitioners had decided to accept remuneration in some months but not in others.
13 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
10 Feb, 2026
Application of Austrian law to liability in tort of directors of Maltese company offering online games of chance in Austria
The CJEU clarifies two important issues regarding the application of the Rome II Regulation: the scope of the exception relating to corporate matters and the determination of the place of damage in the case of games of chance offered via the internet from one Member State in another Member State without the licence required in the latter Member State.
10 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
09 Feb, 2026
Notarial enforcement of pledges. Is Article 1872 of the Civil Code mandatory? In what sense?
The clause agreed upon must comply, for greater certainty, with the provisions of the new judicial enforcement procedure. It will be necessary to agree on an appraised value, which is not required in Article 1872 CC, because otherwise the award would be similar to a ‘forfeiture proviso’ (pactum commissorium), which the Civil Code neutralised with the drastic imposition of extinguishment of the debt in its entirety.
09 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
06 Feb, 2026
Automotive and Sustainable Mobility No. 29
Summary of legislative and jurisprudential developments relating to the automotive sector.
06 Feb, 2026