The sustainability claims Primark makes on large posters in its Dutch stores are misleading. This is the conclusion of the Advertising Law Committee.
The clothing chain includes posters with texts such as “Reduce CO2 emissions by 50%.” “So the planet can breathe freely” and “organic, recycled, sustainable and affordable cotton”. According to the committee, this gives the false impression that this is already the case at Primark, when in fact it is a goal for the future.
Primark did this subtly in its posters, but in letters so small that consumers could easily miss it, the committee said. There are also doubts about the applicability of some claims. Primark, for example, wants in the small print to halve its emissions by 2027, but there is no concrete step-by-step plan for this, according to the committee.
Circular
The committee also found that the claim to stop the use of single-use plastic was misleading.
The committee also decided to prepare a poster with the following statements: “We are turning our clothes into a circular. So the world keeps turning.” This poster, also written in lowercase letters, stated that clothes could be recycled in 2027, but the committee also says that this nuance will probably not be noticed by consumers. In addition, the Committee believes that Primark has not stated clearly enough that the word “circular” in this context means “recyclable”.
The case was brought to the committee by sustainable fashion activist Sara Dubbeldam. Primark is appealing the decision. “Our goals are realistic, achievable and clearly expressed through the annual report,” a spokesperson told fashion platform Fashion United.
As long as the objection remains, the chain does not need to make any adjustments. However, if the decision is upheld on appeal, the committee may ask the regulator, the Consumer and Markets Authority (ACM), to intervene.
something to hold on to
The decision may also provide guidance, for example, for a possible subsequent civil lawsuit. Lawyer Laura van Gijn of law firm De Roos, who appeared before the committee on Dubbeldam’s behalf, said going to civil court was “definitely worth considering”.
It is more common for clothing brands and retail chains to fail to adequately inform consumers about the sustainability of their products. For example, last year the ACM took on Decathlon and H&M for using the terms “eco-design” and “conscious” without explaining what they meant. No sanctions were imposed as both companies promised to inform consumers more clearly in the future and donated a total of €900,000 to various sustainable causes.
Source: NOS
Roy Brown is a renowned economist and author at The Nation View. He has a deep understanding of the global economy and its intricacies. He writes about a wide range of economic topics, including monetary policy, fiscal policy, international trade, and labor markets.
