Case No. CO-2850-2005

59.The letter recited the provisions of the policy, but did not identify “the nature of the product or service being advertised the wording or design of the advertisement or inference contained therein” upon which reliance was placed. Nor did the letter “identify the image or message” or public controversy or sensitivity to which reference was being made, save for stating that the “North Cyprus situation … is clearly a sensitive, ethnic, political issue and a matter of some controversy” (see paragraph 13 above).60.At this stage, the defendant must be taken to have acted on the content of “complaints”, from which it had inferred that the advertising touched the North Cyprus situation so as to be “likely to cause widespread or serious offence to members of the public or sections of the public”.61.The nature of the product or service being advertised was a holiday to North Cyprus. The image or message was the same. The “complaints” took account of the website reference and, by inference, the message from the title page that TRNC was promoting the tourism. The decision letter did not develop this approach. However, the letter of 13th April 2005 clearly raised it.