Greenhouse gas
The judgment prohibits Lufthansa certain CO2 statements in advertising
Companies like to advertise their climate protection efforts. Germany’s largest airline is no longer allowed to make certain statements, says the Cologne Regional Court. An association had sued.
According to a judgment of the Cologne Regional Court, Lufthansa may no longer use certain statements in connection with CO2 compensation or reduction in its advertising for air travel. The German Environmental Aid (DUH) had sued. The district court said that the lawsuit of a consumer association against a large German aviation company was granted fully. The court did not expressly give the names of the plaintiff and defendant. The judgment (Az. 84 O 29/24 of March 21, 2025) is not final.
According to the court’s information, the company may no longer advertise “CO2 emissions by a contribution to climate protection projects” if the following explanation on the climate protection projects used is given: “All projects ensure that either CO2 emissions are saved in the long term or tied from the atmosphere”. In a certain context, the use of the sentence “With our offers for more sustainable flies, you can reduce your flight-related CO2 emissions directly while booking through the use of sustainable flight fuels (SAF).” prohibited.
Lufthansa wants to check judgment
A spokesman for German Lufthansa announced on request: “Lufthansa is known. We are carefully examining it.”
German environmental aid spoke of an “important victory against misleading advertising” of Lufthansa. The court followed the argumentation of the DUH, according to which the company’s compensation and reduction promise is unsustainable. “The court confirms our criticism and addresses how one of the world’s largest airlines systematically deceives customers and pretends to be a climate neutrality of air travel against additional fees,” said Duh federal manager Jürgen Resch, according to the announcement.
DUH: Lufthansa sells a good conscience against “indulgence payment”
“Air travel is the most serious about the burden on the climate. Selling a good conscience against indulgence payments is therefore particularly reprehensible,” continued Resch. For air travelers, there is an impression that they would fly climate-neutral based on completely inadequate compensation and reduction measures.
The consumer is left in the unclear about how a compensation should be made to what extent in relation to his specifically booked or booked flight, the DUH quotes from the reasoning of the chamber. There is also ambiguity about the assessment of the CO2 emissions of the flight booking and their share in climate-damaging. “According to the Chamber, this suggests that the consumer could essentially make his flight to his flight, which is undisputedly wrong.”
The company spokesman emphasized: “Lufthansa continues to pursue projects and measures with the aim of reducing the environmental impact of flying and always using resources required as efficiently as possible.”
dpa
Source: Stern
