Delhi HC grants Dabur interim relief over FSSAI order on '100%' fruit juice claims

The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to Dabur India Ltd, allowing the consumer goods company to continue using the "100%" claim on its fruit juice labels, pending a final decision on its petition challenging an order by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).

The court stayed the operation of the FSSAI's directive that had asked the company to refrain from making the claim, which the regulator said could mislead consumers. The interim stay will remain in force until the next date of hearing, according to reports.

Dabur had moved the court after the FSSAI issued an advisory in November 2023, directing all food business operators to remove the word "100%" from the labels of fruit juices and similar products. The regulator argued that such claims are not accurate because the products contain added sugar, water, and other additives, and are not comprised entirely of fruit content.

The company, in its petition, contested the regulator's interpretation, stating that the claim refers solely to the fruit juice concentrate used in the product and not the overall formulation. It also argued that the advisory was issued in an arbitrary manner, without giving manufacturers an opportunity to present their case.

Dabur further submitted that the directive, if implemented, would cause substantial financial loss and harm its reputation. The company had already printed the "100%" claim on packaging, and altering labels at this stage would disrupt production and distribution, leading to confusion among consumers.

While granting the interim relief, the court reportedly took note of the company's submission that the matter requires scrutiny. The court issued notice to the FSSAI and sought its response, indicating that the case will be examined in detail at the next hearing.

The legal standoff between Dabur and the food regulator is part of a larger push by the FSSAI to regulate 'exaggerated' claims made by packaged food and beverage companies. The authority has been reviewing labels for compliance with the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, which aim to prevent deceptive marketing practices.

Industry observers say the ruling offers temporary relief to Dabur but does not settle the legal question. The outcome of the case could set a precedent for other companies that have received similar directions from the regulator.

The court's decision balances, at least at an interim stage, the regulatory concerns of consumer protection and the commercial interests of manufacturers. The final verdict will depend on a nuanced interpretation of food labelling laws and the evidence placed before the court.

Both parties are expected to file their respective responses before the next hearing. Until then, Dabur can maintain its existing labels, and no coercive action will be taken against the company for non-compliance with the FSSAI's order.

This is not the first instance where the FSSAI has faced legal challenges over its advisories. Companies in the food and beverage sector have previously questioned the regulator's approach to interpreting advertising norms. Courts have, in several instances, called for a clear and transparent framework that does not put an unreasonable burden on businesses.

The term "100%" in food labelling has been a contentious issue globally. While some jurisdictions permit such claims if they refer to a specific component, others require full disclosure of the product's composition. In India, the FSSAI has maintained that such claims are likely to mislead consumers unless the entire product is made from a single ingredient.

For consumers, the outcome of this case may have practical implications. It will determine how fruit juice products are presented in the market, and whether labels that highlight a particular characteristic can coexist with the need for transparent information. The court's final decision could influence how companies market their products and how regulators enforce rules.

Dabur, which sells popular brands like Réal and Del Monte (licensed), has maintained that its products are compliant with existing food safety standards. The company's legal team is expected to argue that the FSSAI's advisory oversteps the powers granted to it under the statute.

The interim relief granted by the Delhi HC should not be interpreted as a final endorsement of Dabur's claim. It is a temporary measure to ensure that the company is not subjected to immediate consequences while the court examines the merits of the case. The final outcome will depend on whether the company can substantiate its contention that the "100%" claim is factually accurate and not misleading.