Danone, the renowned producer of Evian spring water, has successfully defeated a class-action lawsuit challenging its claim of “carbon neutral” labeling on its bottles. A U.S. District Judge in New York reversed an earlier decision that allowed the lawsuit to proceed, marking a significant victory for the company.
The lawsuit, initiated by consumers Stephanie Dorris of California and John Axiotakis of Massachusetts, accused Danone of misleading customers into believing that Evian’s production process was entirely carbon neutral. They argued that the manufacturing methods still resulted in carbon dioxide emissions, contradicting the environmental promises implied by the “carbon neutral” label. The plaintiffs claimed they paid premium prices for Evian, associating the label with eco-friendliness and sustainability.
Initially, on January 10, Judge Nelson Roman ruled that the term “carbon neutral” was ambiguous and suggested that Danone expected too much from consumers in interpreting its meaning. However, following Danone’s request for reconsideration, Judge Roman reassessed his position. In a ruling issued on Thursday, he concluded that reasonable consumers would likely look beyond the front label—featuring picturesque mountains and claims of sourcing from the French Alps—to find more detailed information on the back label. This label directs consumers to Danone’s website, which provides an in-depth explanation of what “carbon neutral” entails.
In his decision, Roman stated that Danone’s representations were “technically true” and that relevant disclosures were accessible to consumers. He emphasized that the information provided allowed consumers to make informed choices about their purchases.
Despite this legal victory for Danone, the plaintiffs’ legal team has been granted permission to file a second amended complaint, indicating that the case may not be entirely over. The plaintiffs’ attorneys have not yet commented on this latest development.
This ruling follows another recent dismissal of a similar lawsuit in Chicago, where a federal judge also rejected claims against Danone regarding its labeling of Evian as “natural,” despite concerns about microplastics found in the product. These legal challenges reflect a growing scrutiny of environmental claims made by companies in light of increasing consumer awareness about sustainability.
Danone’s commitment to transparency and sustainability is evident in its broader product range, which includes popular brands such as Dannon yogurt and Activia. The company operates out of Paris, with its North American headquarters located in White Plains, New York.
The case at hand is referenced as Dorris et al v. Danone Waters of America in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (No. 22-08717). As environmental claims continue to be a focal point for legal scrutiny, this case serves as a critical example of how companies navigate consumer expectations and regulatory standards.
Danone’s successful defense against these allegations highlights the complexities surrounding marketing claims related to sustainability and environmental impact. As more consumers seek products that align with their values regarding climate change and ecological responsibility, companies must ensure their messaging is clear and substantiated.
In conclusion, while Danone has emerged victorious in this particular legal battle over its “carbon neutral” claims, ongoing discussions about transparency in environmental marketing will likely continue to shape the landscape for consumer goods companies moving forward.
Read more: