Selected Cases
Court Grants Stay of Execution Against Corrective Order Issued Under the Food Labelling and Advertising Act
Case Overview
One Law Partners, LLC represented a food company in responding to a corrective order issued by a local government authority for an alleged violation of the Food Labelling and Advertising Act.
The corrective order required the company to change its product name (brand name) on the grounds that it could potentially mislead consumers regarding the product's medical efficacy. Because the order directly affected one of the company's core brand assets, it posed a significant threat to the business.
Accordingly, One Law Partners, LLC filed both an administrative lawsuit seeking revocation of the corrective order and an application for a stay of execution.
The firm successfully obtained a court order staying the effectiveness of the corrective order.
Key Issues
-
Legality of the corrective order issued under the Food Labelling and Advertising Act
-
Whether there was sufficient urgency and a risk of irreparable harm warranting a stay of execution
Legal Strategy
-
Demonstrated that immediate compliance with the corrective order would result in urgent and irreparable harm to the company
-
Argued that maintaining the effectiveness of the corrective order was not necessary when balancing the public interest against the substantial harm that would result from enforcement of the order
-
Established that compliance with the corrective order was effectively impossible under the circumstances due to force majeure factors, including disruptions arising from the Iran conflict and related external conditions
Significance of the Decision
Following proceedings at both the trial and appellate levels concerning the stay application, the effectiveness of the corrective order was suspended until 30 days after the date of the first-instance judgment in the merits action.
As a result, the plaintiff food company was able to continue using its product name and valuable brand assets while pursuing the underlying administrative litigation.
This ensured the practical effectiveness of the merits proceeding, allowed the company to continue its business operations, and successfully protected it from substantial economic losses.
Attorney In-sun Ko | isgo@onelawpartners.com
Attorney Han-mook Choi | hmchoi@onelawpartners.com
Public Relations Team, One Law Partners, LLC | pr@onelawpartners.com

