The head of the Milan Public Prosecutor's Office must therefore consider whether and what type it is and whether a file should be opened or not
The “Pandoro Gate” it is far from closed. Actually, after thatAntitrust lawNow The Milan public prosecutor's office has opened a file in this regard, currently with no suspicion of a crime or suspects. In fact, the prosecutor, Marcello Viola, has a complaint submitted by Codacons and Assourt, the association of users of radio and television services, in which the crime of fraud is suspected. But it's not the only tile hanging over the superstar influencer's head: after the fall of the Pandoro charity project made with Balocco, attention now turns to another charity project that deals with the Easter eggs made with Dolci Preziosi. According to the new article by Selvaggia Lucarellithe Codacons have now announced a new complaint to the competition authorityin which a request to initiate an investigation is made false advertising and unfair business practices.
Chiara Ferragni's “Pandoro goal” ends up in the public prosecutor's office
The Milan public prosecutor's office has opened an investigation file according to Form 45. without suspicion of a crime or suspects: The investigations in the exploratory file are, as far as known, entrusted to the Gdf of Milan. For now, it is about the content of the lawsuit for fraud against “a large number of individuals”, i.e. consumers, as the associations write. However, it is not excluded that they could then be possible also extend to the similar story of the advertising of Dolci Preziosi's Easter eggs.
Codacons had filed the complaint with 104 public prosecutors' offices and, as far as we know, the one in Milan was the first to open a case. A question of local jurisdiction could then arise in the further course of the investigation. While Ferragni is based in Milan, Balocco's headquarters are in the province of Cuneo. The way in which the campaign to sell Pandoro was presented was, as we read in the exhibition, “successful deceptive and aggressivedisregarding the consumers, whose decision-making ability would have been significantly influenced, particularly with regard to the use of the proceeds for seriously ill children.”
The case of useful eggs
Then yesterday, Codacons filed another complaint, this time related to the influencer-sponsored eggs in 2021 and 2022 for Dolci Preziosi. It was she who initiated the case Selvaggia Lucarelli on Fatto Quotidiano. Both the egg packaging and the communication campaign advertised support for the charity project I Bambini delle Fate, an association that works with inclusion projects for children with autism. The influencer would have received – as the owner of Dolci Preziosi, Franco Cannillo – confirmed to the newspaper a fee of 1.2 million (500,000 euros in 2021 and about 700,000 euros in 2022) for the sale of his picture. The donation made to the association by the company alone would have been beneficial 36 thousand euros in two years. So even in this case, something would be wrong, and Lucarelli then revealed how “after some phone calls that took place yesterday to delve deeper into the question of eggs, the…” Old posts promoting Easter eggs on Ferragni’s Instagram page quickly disappeared.”