Greenwashing Court Statistics 2025: Trends & Prospects of Success

The legal battle against greenwashing is gaining momentum. The EU Directive 2024/825 (EmpCo) will sanction further violations from September 2026, but clear trends in case law are already emerging. This article outlines the discernible developments around environmental advertising to give marketing decision-makers orientation on the current situation.

Current Trends in Greenwashing Litigation

Publicly accessible judgments from federal courts (BGH), higher regional courts (OLG) and regional courts (LG) point to a growing engagement with environmental advertising. Claimants tend to prevail where the contested statements were not supported by concrete, verifiable evidence. This underscores the importance of carefully reviewing one's own communications.

Amounts in dispute vary by court level and individual case. This shows that greenwashing litigation is relevant not only in principle, but also economically.

Common Grounds for Claims and Success Factors

Recurring grounds for claims fall into the following categories:

* Climate neutrality claims: Statements based on CO₂ compensation (carbon offsetting). The judgment of the BGH (I ZR 98/23) of 27 June 2024 (Katjes) has raised the bar and requires transparent disclosure of compensation mechanisms. * Generic environmental terms: Terms such as "sustainable", "environmentally friendly" or "green" are frequently classified as misleading if they are not supported by concrete and measurable evidence. * Missing or inadequate certifications: Companies that refer to sustainability aspects must substantiate this with recognised certifications. EU-Bio, Fairtrade FLO or GOTS are examples here. * Misleading information on recycling and materials: Statements about the recyclability of products or the use of sustainable materials must be correct and verifiable.

Defendants typically win when they can present concrete, external certifications, demonstrate a complete methodology (e.g. life cycle analysis, LCA) and respond quickly to cease-and-desist letters.

Relevant Certifications in the Greenwashing Context

The choice of the right certification is crucial. In addition to the certifications already mentioned such as EU-Bio, Demeter or Fairtrade FLO, standards such as OEKO-TEX 100 (textiles), Bluesign (textile production) and FSC/PEFC (wood and paper) are also relevant. For companies wishing to improve their climate balance, ISO 14064-1 (carbon footprint) and SBTi (Science Based Targets initiative) are important references. The use of a recognised certification significantly reduces the risk of litigation.

Outlook for 2026 and the EmpCo Directive

With the full implementation of the EmpCo Directive from 27 September 2026, a significant increase in proceedings is expected. In particular, the per-se prohibitions on "climate neutral" with carbon offsetting (Annex I No. 4c UCPD as amended by EmpCo) and generic claims (Annex I No. 4a UCPD as amended by EmpCo) will lead to an increase in litigation. It is to be expected that institutional litigation (e.g. by consumer associations) will also become more frequent.

Marketing decision-makers should act now and align their communications with the new legal framework. Proactive review of one's own advertising materials, the use of clear and verifiable statements and the use of recognised certifications are crucial steps to minimise the risk of litigation. Early consultation with an experienced lawyer is advisable.