Delhi HC reserves order on jurisdiction in HUL-Beco disparagement case

The court also clarified that no interim or ad-interim relief would be considered until the jurisdiction issue is decided

by e4m Staff
Published: Aug 24, 2026 7:12 PM | 2 min read

The Delhi High Court has reserved its decision on the jurisdiction issue in a disparagement case filed by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) against Kwick Living, the parent company of Beco, regarding a comparative advertising campaign.
HUL's lawsuit claims commercial disparagement, trademark infringement, and passing off due to Beco's campaign, which links HUL's products Surf Excel and Vim to potential skin irritation and allergic reactions.
The court will not consider any interim relief until the jurisdiction matter is resolved and has scheduled a hearing for August 21, with Beco required to submit its response by August 20.
Beco's campaign, titled #WarOnWhatsHidden, was launched through various media and directly compares its products to Surf Excel and Vim, citing independent lab tests that allegedly show harmful chemical levels in HUL's products.

The Delhi High Court has reporetdly reserved its decision on the issue of territorial jurisdiction in the disparagement case filed by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) against Kwick Living (I) Private Limited, the company behind home-cleaning brand Beco.

According to media reports, after hearing detailed submissions from both parties, the court said it would first determine whether it has jurisdiction to hear the matter. It also clarified that no interim or ad-interim relief would be considered until the jurisdiction issue is decided.

HUL has approached the Delhi High Court over a comparative advertising campaign run by D2C homecare brand Beco, which named Surf Excel and Vim in an ingredient-transparency push. The campaign links the products to chemicals it says are associated with skin irritation and allergic reactions.

The suit, filed against Beco's parent company Kwick Living, alleges commercial disparagement, trademark infringement and passing off.

The case came up before the Delhi High Court on August 19, where Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani asked Beco to respond to HUL's plea for an interim injunction against the campaign. The court did not restrain the ads immediately, saying it wanted to hear Beco's side first. The matter is set to be heard again on August 21, with Beco directed to file its reply by August 20.

Beco's two-film effort, titled #WarOnWhatsHidden and created by agency Colloquial, was rolled out through videos, social media posts, influencers and outdoor hoardings, directly comparing Beco's laundry and dishwashing liquids with Surf Excel and Vim.

The campaign targets Surf Excel over the presence of Benzisothiazolinone (BIT) and Linear Alkylbenzene Sulfonate (LAS), and Vim Dishwash over LAS.

Beco has said its findings come from independent testing by an NABL-accredited lab, which recorded BIT and LAS above 10% in the Surf Excel sample and LAS above 8% in the Vim sample. The brand has pointed to scientific and regulatory literature it says links these ingredients to potential skin, eye or allergic reactions, and notes its own laundry and dishwash lines are formulated without BIT or LAS.