- with readers working within the Retail & Leisure industries
- within Consumer Protection, Transport, Food, Drugs, Healthcare and Life Sciences topic(s)
On June 1, 2026, the 6th Civil Court of the São Paulo State Court of Justice issued a ruling in Public Civil Action No. 4069013-38.2025.8.26.0100, ordering a company to pay BRL 5 million in collective moral damages, in addition to complying with certain obligations to act and refrain from acting. The decision was based on environmental communications deemed insufficient to meet the duty to provide information required under Brazil’s Consumer Protection Code (Law No. 8,078/1990).
Why does this decision matter?
The central issue in the ruling was not the validity of the carbon credits used or the merits of the company’s environmental programs. Rather, the dispute focused on how information was communicated to consumers. The company used broad terms such as “compensation” and “neutralization” without disclosing the emissions calculation methodology, the traceability of the carbon credits, or the link between the amount paid and the specific emission-reduction projects involved.
According to the court, associating business activities with sustainability initiatives without demonstrating the effectiveness of the advertised actions constitutes misleading advertising, commonly referred to as greenwashing.
A sign of a trend in a regulatory framework still under development
Although the decision may still be appealed, it appears to be the first judicial ruling in Brazil involving greenwashing in voluntary carbon offset programs. As such, its significance extends beyond the specific facts of the case.
Federal Law No. 15,042/2024, which established the Brazilian Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading System (SBCE), has not yet been fully regulated. Until sector-specific parameters and reporting requirements are defined, companies undertaking voluntary climate commitments operate in an environment of increasing legal scrutiny, precisely because of the absence of detailed regulatory standards.
In this context, the ruling by the 6th Civil Court of São Paulo provides a practical benchmark: environmental claims are already subject to judicial review under the Consumer Protection Code, regardless of specific carbon market regulations. Organizations that communicate environmental benefits to consumers must therefore be prepared to substantiate their claims with verifiable, traceable, and transparent data.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]
