Skip to content
← Articles

Historic Win Against Greenwashing As KLM’s Advertising Ruled Illegal

Crime

The judge ruled that KLM’s claims suggesting that flying can be or is becoming sustainable, as well as advertising suggesting that its "offsetting" products reduce or compensate for the climate impact of flying are misleading and therefore unlawful.

KLM’s claims that it was ‘committed to the Paris Agreement climate goals’ were also found to fall foul of the law, as claims about the feasibility of KLM’s targets paint “too rosy a picture” given the limited measures the airline is deploying. This ruling will set a precedent for all companies promoting net zero commitments, and their public relations firms and advertising agencies should also take note. 

Dutch campaigners Fossielvrij and Reclame Fossielvrij – with support from environmental law charity ClientEarth – filed the claim in July 2022, marking the first lawsuit worldwide to tackle aviation industry greenwashing. It alleged the airline’s marketing breached the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive.

Sustainable aviation fuels & ‘offsets’  

The Court said that the term “sustainable” to describe alternative aviation fuels (called SAF by the industry) is not concrete enough to be promoted as a promising solution to aviation’s emissions. Specifically, it found: “At the moment, SAF's share in total fuel consumption (and hence CO2 emissions reduction) is still very limited due to various reasons. A more substantial share can only be expected in the distant future, and thus uncertain. The expression is therefore misleading.”

Ruling on KLM’s promotions for customers to ‘offset’ the climate impact of their flights by paying towards reforestation schemes, the Court also considered that “there is no direct link between customers’ tangible contribution and the impact of CO2 emissions from its flight”. 

KLM had eventually retracted the advertising claims challenged in response to the lawsuit. Therefore, the Court did not see the need to issue further orders sought by the claimants, and it found that a ban on future similar claims was too uncertain. The decision implies that public judgement itself should be enough. However, because the Court found mainly against KLM, it ordered the company to pay the claimants’ costs.

Fossil fuel ad ban

The organisations are calling for a tobacco-style ad ban on fossil-fuel based goods, citing the significant harm these products cause to people’s health and livelihoods through fuelling dangerous climate change.

The District Court of Amsterdam’s ruling is also likely to inform future cases. The issues within the lawsuit have already been taken up by the European umbrella consumer organisation BEUC in an EU-wide regulatory complaint denouncing misleading sustainability claims made by 17 European airlines.