BGH on climate-neutral advertising: I ZR 98/23

BGH, Judgment of 27 June 2024 – I ZR 98/23. Environmental advertising requires clear statements and appropriate evidence. The verdict on advertising with "climate neutral" illustrates this standard. For the use of such statements in 2026, the amended version of the UWG must also be examined.

The Legal Core of the Decision

The procedure was about advertising that claimed climate-neutral production. The term could be understood as a avoidance of emissions or compensation by compensation. Under these circumstances, the Federal Court of Justice already demanded a clear explanation in advertising itself.

The decision follows on from the strict requirements for the accuracy and clarity of environmental information. Reduction and compensation are not easily equivalent. The judgment thus concerns the avoidance of a misleading overall impression; it is not a general permission to justify any claim of climate neutrality by means of a supplementary link.

Why Today's Trial Continues

The current UWG Annex contains specific prohibitions on consumers. This includes the product-related statement of neutral, reduced or positive greenhouse gas effects as described in point 4c when it is based on compensation. An explanation cannot easily overcome such an explicit prohibition.

In addition, other rules concern general environmental statements, the scope of a statement and sustainability labels. For future objectives, § 5 paragraph 3 point 4 of the UWG contains additional requirements for obligations, implementation plan and review. An earlier advertising release should therefore be re-examined in the case of changes to the legal situation.

Practical consequence for advertising release

The following approach combines legal review and reliable documentation. First, the exact text is considered together with images, seals and placement. It is then necessary to clarify whether a particular statement already falls under an explicit prohibition. Only then does the further question arise whether the remaining presentation is accurate and sufficiently explained.

The evidence shall cover the same subject matter as advertising. An improvement of the packaging does not necessarily bear a statement about the entire product. For comparative data, reference size, period and calculation are required. In the case of a supplier's information, it must be checked whether it covers its own statement at all.

What should be documented internally

• The released advertising including design and target group.
• The evidence, its scope and responsible department.
• Limitations which must be retained in any version used.
• Occasions for a re-examination, such as product changes or expire certificates.

A more concise statement can be easier to verify. However, it must be true in its own right and must not go further in the overall impression than existing evidence. For a concrete campaign, the page explains Environmental claims and sustainability the scope of possible advice.

Legal basis and decisions: CJ, judgment I ZR 98/23; Annex to Section 3, paragraph 3 of the UWG; § 5 UWG.

Situation as at 2 November 2026.

Further reading: Environmental claims and sustainability · Trade and e-commerce · Compliance consulting: order, process and results