The advertising of a company producing ecologic cleaning supplies was challenged on grounds of misleading advertising. The company had previously advertised its products as “climate neutral”. The applicant challenged the use of the label, as the company did not specify whether all of its emissions formed part of these calculations, or which ones were excluded; did not indicate the scope of its reduction measures; or specify the type of offset. On the basis of the act against unfair competition, the applicant submitted that the term “climate neutral” needed more clarification than what was provided by the company.
The Higher Regional Court overturned, in part, the findings of the lower court. It held that information was required as to whether the term “climate neutrality” used in the advertising was achieved in whole or in part through offsetting measures. Clarification was also required, as to whether certain emissions were excluded from the emissions reporting. Finally, information needed to be included that provided context on the criteria used for the “climate neutral” seal. The company was ordered to cease certain forms of advertising.
Case Documents:
No case documents are available.