fbpx

Axe Antiperspirant Causes Stains It Claims to Protect Against Class Action

Unilever’s official company name is Conopco, Inc., and it makes personal care products, including Axe brand products. The company makes claims about its “Anti Marks Protection” for its Axe antiperspirants. However, the complaint alleges that the product not only does leave white marks and yellow stains, it claims the marks and stains are caused by the active ingredient in the antiperspirant.

The class for this action is all persons who bought the Axe branded antiperspirant with so-called “Anti Marks Protection” in the US, between May 20, 2016 and May 20, 2021. A Missouri Subclass has also been defined for those who bought the product during this period in Missouri.

The products at issue include Axe brand antiperspirants including in the following types or scents:

  • Gold Original
  • Signature Gold
  • Signature Night
  • 48HR Charge Up Protection
  • Signature Island

Unilever advertises that the Axe antiperspirant product as having “a unique formula with anti white marks and yellow stains protection” and as leaving “No White Marks” and “No Yellow Stains.” Some containers extend this promise to “protects your shirts from white marks and yellow stains.”

Not only does the product leave such marks and stains, the complaint alleges; it is the active aluminum ingredient in the product—aluminum zirconium tetrachlorohydrex GLY—that causes the marks and stains, “generally upon being mixed with a user’s perspiration[.]” The complaint allows that it might be said that the product causes less staining or fewer white marks than other similar products, but that is not the claim on the product container.

In addition to causing the white marks and yellow staining it claims not to cause, the complaint claims says that the product is “completely absent of any ingredients that could be considered capable of giving it a benefit of ‘protecting’ against stains or marks…”

Furthermore, the complaint alleges, the “Anti Marks Protection” product “does not have a single ingredient not contained in at least one variety of the non-“Anti Marks Protection” [products] except for silica.” The complaint contends that the purpose of the silica is only to absorb moisture from sweat.

The complaint alleges that “it is scientifically well-established that aluminum in some antiperspirants causes white marks and staining,” so that brands that wish to avoid this problem simply do not contain this aluminum ingredient. The complaint cites the examples of “peptide-based products such as Klima Hyper-Dri Antiperspirant Serum and Perspi-Guard Maximum Strength Antiperspirant.”

Because the Axe antiperspirant causes the marks and stains it purports not to cause, the complaint calls its claims “false and misleading.” It alleges breach of warranty and violations of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, among other things.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer

Most Recent Case Event

Axe Antiperspirant Causes Stains It Claims to Protect Against Complaint

May 20, 2021

Unilever’s official company name is Conopco, Inc., and it makes personal care products, including Axe brand products. The company makes claims about its “Anti Marks Protection” for its Axe antiperspirants. However, the complaint alleges that the product not only does leave white marks and yellow stains, it claims the marks and stains are caused by the active ingredient in the antiperspirant.

Axe Antiperspirant Causes Stains It Claims to Protect Against Complaint

Case Event History

Axe Antiperspirant Causes Stains It Claims to Protect Against Complaint

May 20, 2021

Unilever’s official company name is Conopco, Inc., and it makes personal care products, including Axe brand products. The company makes claims about its “Anti Marks Protection” for its Axe antiperspirants. However, the complaint alleges that the product not only does leave white marks and yellow stains, it claims the marks and stains are caused by the active ingredient in the antiperspirant.

Axe Antiperspirant Causes Stains It Claims to Protect Against Complaint
Tags: Deceptive Advertising, Deceptive Labels, Item Does Not Do What It Is Advertised to Do