COMPLIANCE & RIGHT · TREATY
Words such as "sustainable", "environmentally friendly" or "climate neutral" convey far-reaching ideas. Whether an advertising statement is admissible depends on its exact wording, overall impression and existing evidence. We check product advertising, packaging, websites and sustainability communication before publication and in case of complaints.
Statement and proof must concern the same subject matter
First of all, what the mentioned traffic understands from advertising. Is it about a single product, its packaging, a production step or the whole company? A proof of a limited sub-area does not automatically bear a statement about the entire offer.
The examination captures text, image, seal and the concrete placement. A restrictive explanation shall not be contrary to the stated statement. The up-to-dateness of the evidence is also important: supplier changes, new production sites or changed calculation methods can make a previously used statement incorrect.
Specific prohibitions in the applicable UWG
The annex to Section 3(3) of the UWG now contains special prohibitions on consumers. These include, among other things, sustainability labels without the required certification system or state basis, certain unproven general environmental statements and statements about the entire product or company, although only one aspect is affected.
Certain product-related statements on neutral, reduced or positive greenhouse gas effects are also covered if they are based on a compensation of emissions. An additional explanation does not automatically allow a statement prohibited by the Annex. This is to be distinguished from the general error test.
These specific prohibitions concern commercial practices directed at consumers. In business-to-business dealings, the general rules on misleading conduct and the particular contractual circumstances remain relevant. Addressing business customers exclusively therefore does not permit unsupported claims.
What the case law on climate neutrality shows
In its judgment of 27 June 2024, I ZR 98/23, the Bundesgerichtshof stressed the requirements for the clarity of environmental advertising. The ambiguous term "climate neutral" already required an explanation of the concrete meaning in advertising itself. Avoidance of emissions and their compensation are not legally equivalent.
Today's advertising measures must also take into account the changed legal situation. Therefore, from an earlier judgment no general release for a statement which is currently subject to an explicit prohibition must be derived. The Case review explains this distinction on the basis of the procedure.
Establishing a verifiable documentation
For a release, the exact advertising coverage, target group, used channels and underlying evidence are compiled. This may include calculations, test reports, certificate conditions and supplier documents. System boundaries, reference period and comparative values used should be apparent.
Marketing and department should determine which statement has been released and when it needs to be re-examined. This also applies to translations and shortened versions for ads or social media. A carefully checked version does not protect against a misleading short text.
Seals, objectives and comparisons
In the case of a seal, rights to use, criteria and control procedures shall be examined. Self-designed characters can suggest an independent test status that actually does not exist. Future environmental targets require a separate examination of their concrete legal requirements and the reliable implementation basis. Comparative information must make the object of comparison and the calculation comprehensible.
We support the legal release, revision of statements and response to warnings. For a Request first send the text and the intended use; Evidence and technical documentation will then be specifically coordinated.
Legal basis and decisions: § 2 UWG – Terms on Environmental and Sustainability Statements; Annex to Section 3(3) of the UWG, in particular Nos 2a and 4a–4c; § 5 UWG – misleading business actions; BGH, Judgment of 27 June 2024 – I ZR 98/23.
Situation as at 2 November 2026.
Further reading: Trade and e-commerce · Contracts and distribution · Advertising with climate neutrality: BGH judgment and today's legal situation
Four practical examples
The following fictitious cases illustrate typical examination questions. The concrete solution depends on the circumstances of the individual case.
01 · Climate neutral product
A manufacturer bases the statement on compensation certificates. Admissibility and concrete statement are examined on the basis of the applicable UWG; a supplementary notice does not cure any legal prohibition.
02 · Environmental advantage of packaging
An advertisement creates an advantage of the entire product, only the packaging is documented. Reference subject and design will be limited accordingly.
03 · Own sustainability seal
A company designs a green seal of approval. Admissibility, substance and required certification basis are checked before use.
04 · Future climate target
A campaign promises to reduce emissions later. Plans, intermediate targets, evidence and legal requirements are compared with actual implementation.
Your next step
Do you want to transfer the requirements to your company or have a specific process checked? A brief description and a reference to existing deadlines are sufficient for the first contact. We shall vote on the scope of examination and compensation prior to commissioning.