Katjes advertising with climate neutrality is misleading
Climate Change Causes Concern. Ways to Earn Money. Some manufacturers are advertising with the label "climate neutral." Katjes did not want its Fruit Gums to give the feeling of being responsible for the next extreme weather event. However, this is not in order.
Companies may only use the term "climate neutral" in advertising if they explain what it means in the advertising itself. The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decided this in a dispute between the Central Office for the Fight against Unfair Competition and the confectionery manufacturer Katjes. Katjes may no longer use the contested advertisement (Az.: I ZR 98/23).
This appeared in a trade journal for the food industry in 2021. It stated: "Since 2021, Katjes has produced all products climate neutral." The "climate neutral" label was visible on the Fruit Gum packaging, as well as the URL of the partner company ClimatePartner. The website could be accessed directly via a QR code.
Risk of Misrepresentation Particularly High
The production of Fruit Gums itself was not climate neutral, but Katjes compensated for the emissions through the support of climate protection projects. The Advertising Standards Authority considered the advertising misleading and therefore won the case before the BGH.
According to the presiding judge Thomas Koch during the judgment reading, the risk of misrepresentation is particularly high in environmental advertising. A ambiguous term like "climate neutral" must therefore be explained in the advertising itself - hints outside the advertising are not sufficient. This is especially important because the compensation of emissions is not equivalent to the reduction of greenhouse gases, Koch explained. For climate protection, it is more important to avoid greenhouse gases.
Reiner Münker, the managing director of the Advertising Standards Authority, was pleased with the decision. All manufacturers must adhere to this, he said - "this applies industry-wide." The consumer organization Foodwatch also welcomed the BGH's decision, but also called for clearer rules for climate advertising from politics.
- The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decided that companies may only use the term "climate neutral" in advertising if they explain what it means within the advertising itself, due to the risk of misrepresentation being particularly high in environmental advertising.
- Reiner Münker, the managing director of the Advertising Standards Authority, was pleased with the decision and stated that all manufacturers must adhere to this rule industry-wide.
- Katjes, a confectionery manufacturer, was discouraged from using the contested advertisement that claimed its Fruit Gums were "climate neutral," as it was deemed misleading by the Advertising Standards Authority and the BGH.
- The consumer organization Foodwatch welcomed the BGH's decision but also called for clearer rules for climate advertising from politics, as it is essential for climate protection to avoid greenhouse gases, according to Presiding Judge Thomas Koch.
