- Advertising with the "climate neutral" logo can have a significant influence on consumers' purchasing decisions.
- The Frankfurt am Main Higher Regional Court has prohibited the use of the logo by a provider.
- The applicant considers the term "climate neutral" to be misleading and in need of explanation.
- The Regional Court dismissed the urgent appeal, the Higher Regional Court later ruled in favor of the ban.
- Companies are obliged to provide information about the fundamental circumstances of climate neutrality.
- Consumers expect all significant emissions to be avoided or offset.
- Legal advice is strongly recommended in such cases.
Advertising with the “climate neutral” logo can have a significant impact on consumers’ purchasing decisions. Basic circumstances of the climate neutrality claimed by the company must therefore be explained. The Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main (OLG) therefore prohibited a supplier from advertising its products with the logo “climate neutral” because this clarification was lacking.
Both parties produce ecological detergents, cleaners and cleaning agents. The respondent advertises its products on its website with, among other things, the logo “Climate Neutral”. The applicant objects, among other things, to advertising using this term. It considers the term “climate neutral” to be in need of explanation and the advertising therefore to be non-transparent and misleading.
The Regional Court had dismissed the application for an injunction. On appeal, the OLG ordered the defendant to refrain from using the “Climate Neutral” logo. The advertising was misleading. The advertising of a company or its products with a supposed climate neutrality could have a considerable influence on the purchase decision. There is therefore an obligation to provide information on the fundamental circumstances of the climate neutrality claimed by the company. The consumer assumes with the disputed “climate neutral” logo that basically all significant emissions of the company are avoided or compensated. He does not readily accept the exclusion of certain types of emissions – as undertaken by the respondent.
Also in this modern things, therefore, prior legal advice is advised 😉
