Offset / climate neutral

natureOffice statement on the BGH decision

2/26/25Reading time:

The Wettbewerbszentrale, which has long been involved in reviewing advertising claims, has repeatedly criticized the fact that the term "climate neutral" is often used in a misleading way. It criticizes the fact that companies give the impression that they have completely reduced their CO₂ emissions, while in fact often only compensation measures, such as the purchase of CO₂ certificates, are carried out. The criticism is aimed at the fact that consumers are often unable to recognize whether the advertised climate neutrality has been achieved through an effective reduction in emissions or merely through offsetting measures.

The BGH has now confirmed this view: In its most recent decision (judgment of June 27, 2024 - case no. I ZR 98/23), it clarified that consumers must already be able to understand in the advertising whether climate neutrality is achieved by actually reducing CO2 emissions or by offsetting CO2 via climate protection projects. This is important in order to avoid misleading consumers within the meaning of Section 5 of the Unfair Competition Act (UWG).

By stating that climate neutrality through reduction weighs more heavily than through CO2 offsetting, the BGH clarifies the challenges and misunderstandings surrounding the terms balancing, reduction and climate neutrality. The ruling relates to products for which the minimum balancing requirement includes a cradle-to-gate assessment. This means that emissions must be recorded in the upstream value chain. Climate neutrality for products must refer to the same minimum system boundaries. Climate neutrality for products without CO2 offsetting is therefore virtually impossible. Reduction and offsetting must go hand in hand, and it is important to reduce emissions both in the manufacturing company and in the upstream and downstream value chain.

Due to current developments on the climate protection market and the forthcoming regulations of the Green Claims Initiative, natureOffice has further developed its long-standing climate-neutral label. The new label deliberately dispenses with the term "climate neutral". Instead, the new natureOffice label focuses on system limits, emission quantities and the reference to offsetting emissions.

"Our long-standing climate-neutral label still stands up to the latest court rulings," says Managing Director Andreas Weckwert. "However, we recommend that our customers switch to our new label system in the long term. We will gradually phase out the old climate-neutral label, but we want to give our customers enough time to make the switch.

This makes the news that both labels, supplemented by the additions 'offset by CO2 compensation' and 'CO2 emissions offset', meet the requirements of the BGH ruling on advertising with climate neutrality for products and therefore also meet the requirements of the Wettbewerbszentrale all the more pleasing.

At natureOffice, we attach great importance to ensuring the best quality and security for our customers. Our focus is on providing high-quality solutions to protect our climate while adhering to the highest standards. Clear communication and meaningful climate neutrality labeling logos are our top priority. We do not water down transparency in favor of commercial success. We focus on credibility and clarity so that our customers know exactly how climate neutrality is achieved.