Greenwashing risk management update: TotalEnergies engaged in misleading commercial practices with its climate-related claims, French court rules

The regulatory, litigation and reputational risks for companies around greenwashing are multiplying. Now, companies operating in Europe have even more reason to consider carefully what green claims they make: on 23 October 2025, a French court ruled that TotalEnergies and its TotalEnergies Electricité et Gaz France, in charge of electricity and gas production on the French market, deliberately made claims likely to mislead consumers about the scope of its environmental commitments. This follows other recent greenwashing verdicts against KLM in the Netherlands and Lufthansa in Germany.

The Court held that TotalEnergies had misled consumers in its advertising by leading them to believe that by buying its products or services, they were contributing to the emergence of a low-carbon economy without detailing the specific implementation plan for achieving this stated objective. This was at odds with the company continuing to increase its production and investment in oil and gas, against Paris Agreement-aligned scientific advice, which requires an immediate reduction in fossil fuel production.

The case was brought by Friends of the Earth France, Greenpeace France and Notre Affaire à Tous, with the support of ClientEarth. The Court noted that practices recognised as misleading constitute attacks on the collective interests that environmental protection associations have set themselves the task of defending.

The Court ordered, among other things, that the company must remove the language at issue from its website and online platforms, and display the judgment prominently on its website for 180 days (albeit this latter order is not immediately enforceable and will not become so in the event of an appeal lodged by TotalEnergies and TotalEnergies Electricité et Gaz France). It must also pay each of the claimants EUR 8,000 compensation for the non-pecuniary damage suffered.

Other issues raised in the complaint were determined to be outside consumer law.

What is the broader regulatory picture?

The judgment referred to a central pillar of the EU’s bid to tackle greenwashing – the Directive on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition (Empowering Consumers Directive), designed to strengthen consumer protection against unfair commercial practices and to improve the quality of information available about the environmental and social impacts of products. The Empowering Consumers Directive restricts making an environmental claim related to future environmental performance without a detailed and realistic implementation plan, and advertising benefits to consumers that are irrelevant and do not result from any feature of the product or service. It also extends the list of commercial practices which must be considered unfair, including those associated with greenwashing. 

The European Commission had proposed an additional Green Claims Directive (GCD), intended to complement and further operationalise the Empowering Consumers Directive by providing more specific rules for businesses on the substantiation, verification and communication of environmental claims. The progress of the GCD has stalled, however, and there is as yet no clear timetable for its revival. 

The UK Government and industry regulators have also been enhancing their approach to protecting consumers from misleading claims, including environmental claims. This set of laws and regulatory frameworks includes the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)’s Green Claims Code, the CMA’s new powers under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCC) and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)’s anti-greenwashing rule. Such laws and regulations are supported by authoritative guidance – notably the CMA Green Claims Code, which makes clear that companies should have robust, credible, relevant and up-to-date evidence available to support any claims made, as well as the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA)’s codes.

In the US, on a state level, California‘s Voluntary Carbon Markets Disclosures Act requires companies that make net zero or carbon-neutral claims in California – including non-US entities – to publish disclosures that increase transparency around those claims and any use of voluntary carbon offsets. Covered entities must also provide specified information about the greenhouse gas emissions associated with their claims.

What can companies do now?

In light of the complex, multi-jurisdictional risk environment around potential greenwashing claims, there are some best practice principles companies can follow across global supply chains:

1. Make the basis of the claim clear: Do not assume high audience knowledge. Specify if benefits depend on consumer action or behaviour change, and frame claims to protect those who may be more susceptible of being misled.
2. Substantiate with robust evidence: Hold documentary proof for all express and implied claims. Comparative terms like “greener” or “friendlier” are only acceptable if they can be justified, either with a competitor’s product or a company’s own prior product.
3. Disclose limitations and qualifications: Present all material qualifiers prominently and accessibly so consumers can consider them before purchase.
4. Cover the full lifecycle or specify which part is covered: Avoid unqualified terms (e.g., “100% eco-friendly”, “less plastic”, “zero emissions”) unless they reflect the product’s overall impact. If referring only to a part of the lifecycle, state that clearly.
5. Treat “carbon neutral” / “net zero” with caution: Explain the basis of the claim, provide accurate information on actual immediate emissions reductions and credible, verifiable strategies for future goals and disclose details of any offsetting scheme used.

For further guidance and tailored advice on greenwashing legislation or anything else discussed in this briefing, please get in touch with kerry.stares@crsblaw.com or with your usual Charles Russell Speechlys contact.