- The customer thought he was buying a South African Samsung model but instead received a grey import from Morocco without knowing it.
- ARB ruled the advert misleading because it failed to disclose the device’s parallel import status.
- Advertising members were instructed to reject similar adverts unless full disclosure is made.
When a South African consumer clicked “buy” on what he believed was a Samsung Galaxy A56 for just over R10 000, he thought he was getting a locally supported device with access to official updates, repairs, and warranty assistance.
What he received instead, without being told, was a grey import from Morocco, a product never approved for the South African market and unsupported by Samsung South Africa.
It was only when the consumer approached Samsung for assistance that the truth came to light. The phone had not been authorised for distribution in South Africa. It was a parallel import. The official support the buyer assumed would come with he device simply did not exist.
That discovery triggered a formal complaint to the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB), which issued a ruling that omission can be just as misleading as outright deception.
Advertising silence that costs a consumer
The complaint centred on an online advertisement published on Takealot by P $ Accessories promoting the Samsung Galaxy A56. Nowhere in that listing was the consumer told that the phone was a grey import. There was no disclaimer, no warning and no explanation about the absence of official support. The advertiser was given the opportunity to explain itself. It chose silence.
The Directorate recorded its dissatisfaction in unusually blunt terms, stating, “It is always frustrating for the Directorate to make a decision in the absence of a response – especially in a matter like this where it appears that there may be a reasonable or technical explanation to the problem experienced by the Complainant.” No explanation ever arrived.
Instead, the ARB was left to evaluate the advertisement on its face. The Board noted, “The Directorate notes that there is no visible disclaimer or any information within the advertisement indicating that the advertised device is a parallel import.” That absence, the Board found, was decisive.
Why grey imports must be disclosed
Although parallel imports are legal in South Africa, they must be sold honestly. That principle is rooted in consumer protection law and reinforced by advertising standards.
The ruling leaned on the Consumer Protection Act to explain what consumers are entitled to expect. Although the ARB does not enforce the Act directly, it uses its provisions to highlight what constitutes fair dealing in the marketplace.
The Directorate quoted the law in plain terms, stating that a seller who markets grey goods “must apply a conspicuous notice to those goods in the prescribed manner and form”. Regulations go even further by requiring sellers to disclose that official warranties will not be honoured and that the manufacturer may refuse support entirely.
The Board explained that these requirements shape how the public understands advertising and set the minimum standard for honesty. In this case, the Directorate held that the absence of disclosure created a false impression.
It declared, “It is clear that the consumer would expect a parallel import to carry a declaration; and that the absence of such a declaration would be understood to mean that the product is not a parallel import.”
What would a reasonable buyer think?
To decide whether the advert crossed the line, the ARB applied a simple test. Would a reasonable consumer, seeing the advert, assume the phone was officially distributed in South Africa? The answer was unambiguous.
The ruling said, “A hypothetical reasonable person might, on seeing the advertisement, conclude that the advertised device is officially distributed by Samsung in South Africa, and will therefore be misled, as this appears ex facie to be untrue.”
The ruling and its impact
The ARB concluded that the advertisement violated Clause 4.2.1 of the Code of Advertising Practice, which prohibits advertising that misleads through omission or ambiguity. In its final finding, the Directorate stated, “The advertisement is misleading in a manner that contravenes Clause 4.2.1 of Section II.”
Because P $ Accessories is not a member of the ARB, the ruling does not directly bind the advertiser. However, the decision still has force. The Board instructed its members not to accept advertisements for the Samsung Galaxy A56 from the advertiser unless the parallel import status is clearly stated.
In real terms, that means responsible platforms, publishers and agencies must refuse listings that disguise grey imports as local products.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
